Category: Republicans

The Republican Party and Reagan

A very interesting piece is in the Wall Street Journal today, about the Republican Party and the Era of Ronald Reagan. Republicans and most Conservatives; including this writer, find themselves nostalgic about the Reagan era. The 1980’s was a magical time for me. I could get into all that; but this entry would soon turn into a sappy trip down memory lane. Because I am not ready to break out the ensure and reminisce about the good old days just yet, I will spare you the stories. —– I mean, I am only 36 people, give a guy a break!

Getting back on track here, the Wall Street Journal does an excellent piece on the Era of Reagan and the Republican Party. Here is a summary video:

Quote:

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush made headlines last weekend suggesting it’s time for the party to get over its glory days: “I felt like there was a lot of nostalgia and the good old days in the [GOP] messaging. I mean, it’s great, but it doesn’t draw people toward your cause.” Joyful Democratic bloggers put this more clearly in five tight words: GOP Needs to Forget Reagan.

Is this true?

The answer to that historic question is an apt subject this week as the GOP, looking for a path from the wilderness, says farewell at National Cathedral tomorrow to Jack Kemp, who remained a Reaganite to the end.

Jack Kemp, anyone who spent time around him will tell you, stayed on message. That message, like Reagan’s, had a number of parts, but it is not possible to even guess how many times Jack Kemp summarized his explanations of that message in three words: “Work, save and invest.” Republicans should think hard about building a governing philosophy on the foundation of those three words, ideas that most voters understand.

The article goes on to praise Jack Kemp and to further praise Reagan and his ideals. Those ideals, I believe, are important to remember; Self-Reliance, Small Government, Personal Freedom, all are commendable principles and are ones that all Americans should know and believe in. However, it would be a monumental mistake to sit here and not acknowledge the fact that Ronald Reagan’s policies were not perfect at all. The fact is the man had flaws. As humans, we tend to gloss over the bad parts of a President legacy that we hold in high esteem. Even President Franklin Roosevelt, of whom I admire greatly, had flaws as well. Some of his policies did more to hurt, than they did to help.

Richard Gamble over at The American Conservative, writes a very interesting piece on the policies and legacy of President Ronald Reagan, here are some excerpts:

Such an endorsement from one of the greatest inspirations of the post-World War II conservative renaissance carries considerable authority with the movement. And rightly so. It should give pause to anyone reckless enough to challenge Reagan’s legacy. But that legacy itself raises nagging questions. The federal payroll was larger in 1989 than it had been in 1981. Reagan’s tax cuts, whatever their merits as short-term fiscal policy, left large and growing budget deficits when combined with increased spending, and added to the national debt. His tax increases were among the largest proportionate ones in U.S. history. And more than one historian has called Reagan’s foreign policy “Wilsonian.” In short, it is hard in 2009 to point to any concrete evidence that the Reagan Revolution fundamentally altered the nation’s trajectory toward bloated, centralized, interventionist government. Conservatism in the 1980s made its peace with much of liberalism—if not with all of its legislative agenda, then at least with its means to power. Republicans and Democrats now argue over how big the bailouts should be or how long the troops should remain deployed, rarely about first principles.

(…)

Reagan’s speeches abounded with themes that were anything but conservative. He aligned the Republican crusader more closely with America’s expansive liberal temperament. In particular, his brand of evangelical Christianity, combined with fragments of Puritanism, enlightenment optimism, and romantic liberalism, set Reagan apart in key ways from historic conservatism.

(…)

Reagan grew up in the 1920s in Dixon, Illinois in the pietistic, revivalist world of the Disciples of Christ—a world known to many millions of American evangelicals then and since. Biographer Edmund Morris’s Dutch (1999) and Paul Kengor’s God and Ronald Reagan (2004) make much of the “practical Christianity” espoused by Reagan’s mother, the local pastor and congregation, and such religious best-sellers as That Printer of Udell’s. This activist faith shared important assumptions with the social gospel’s “applied Christianity.” Both set out to remake the City of Man through the power of the church’s moral influence. Reagan’s spirituality was shaped by a “Jesus-only” populist Christianity that emphasized the conversion experience and an activist faith suspicious of creeds, rituals, ecclesiastical bodies, and denominational boundaries.

Reagan never turned away from this transformationist Christianity. It became a fundamental part of his civil religion. Historian John Patrick Diggins, in Ronald Reagan: Fate, Freedom, and the Making of History (2007), goes as far as to say that the president’s theology “seemed to offer a Christianity without Christ and the crucifixion, a religion without reference to sin, evil, suffering, or sacrifice.” Diggins’s implicit question, “Why couldn’t Reagan have been more like Reinhold Niebuhr?” may not be exactly the right one. Why should we expect our presidents to do theology at all, even neo-orthodox theology? But his point is well taken. Reagan’s optimistic Christianity seemed ready made for an America disinclined to hear talk of limits to power and wealth. The historic Christian message can sound downright un-American.

(…)

In a further criticism, Lukacs traced the “militarization of the image of the presidency” to Reagan. It was Reagan, after all, who began the practice of returning the salutes of the military—a precedent followed by every president since. While doing so may seem to honor the military, it in fact erodes the public’s understanding of the presidency as a civilian office, Lukacs argued. Indeed, Fox News bears out Lukacs’s warning. The cable news giant got into the habit during the Bush II administration of referring to the president as commander in chief no matter what story they were reporting, seemingly unaware that the nation’s executive is the commander in chief of the Armed Forces of the Untied States and not commander in chief of the American people at large. If the president visits a city ravaged by a hurricane, he is emphatically not there in his role as commander in chief. If every American thinks of the president—of whatever political party—as my commander in chief and not narrowly as the Army or Navy’s commander in chief, then we have taken another decisive step from republic to empire. If every American expects the president to be the commander in chief of the economy, then we can’t be surprised by nationalized banks and corporations.

I think it would be a good idea to read that article in it’s entirety to truly get what is being said. It is indeed a truly interesting article to read.

My take on the subject at hand is this; The Republican Party needs to catch up with the times. This is not 1981; this is 2009, America is facing some serious challenges in this new era. The Republican Party needs to provide a sane alternative to the socialist madness of the Democratic Party; doing so, while keeping Reagan’s principles in mind. But the Republican Party must also be mindful that some, not all, some of Reagan’s policies did more to hurt, than they did to help. If they do this properly, they will be able to retake the White House in 2012. Another important issue is who they choose to run against Obama in 2012. If they try and run someone like Mitt Romney or Sarah Palin, they are going to get eaten alive in the election. However, if they run someone like Mark Sanford; they might just have a chance at winning. The problem with the Republican Party has not been principles, but the framing of the Party’s message. The Party needs to be a little more Mark Sanford and Ron Paul, and maybe even Pat Buchanan and much less Coulter, Limbaugh, Hannity and Ingraham. There is nothing wrong with Conservative principles, but when the people that are attempting to promote them are doing more to alienate, than they are to actually promote them, something is wrong.

It has been said, that you can catch more files with honey than you can with vinegar. The Republican Party needs to work on that.

Update: Thanks to memeornadum for the link in and hello to the readers from that service! 😀

Update #2:  Hello to all the readers of the Moderate Voice, thanks to Joe for the link in! 😀

We're such nasty fascists!

If there was any one person that I still feel funny about linking to, it’s Jonah Goldberg. When I was still “Left of Center”, I despised the man. However, once I switched my moderate “Right of center” position, I began to see that Mr. Goldberg was a bit more right about liberalism, than I thought.

Goldberg makes the following observation:

Here’s a really perfectly distilled bit of stereotypical idiocy about the threat from the oogy-boogy-gun-loving-Right by Sara Robinson of the Campaign for America’s Future . It’s funny how I thought it was cribbed from David Neiwert and all of his campus coffeehouse philosophizing and — lo and behold — on page two the author reveals she is a colleague of Neiwert’s. It’s tiresome overheated nonsense that actually fits the us vs. them paranoia she ascribes to the Right better than most of the stuff you’ll ever find on the Right.

Do go follow the link, it is a very interesting read. I didn’t read it all myself. I couldn’t stomach the bile that comes out of the far left this early in the morning. Even I have limits. Even Goldberg’s readers were not very pleased with it either. Yes, I know, Goldberg is a Neo-Conservative; but he makes some very valid points about the left.  Especially when it comes to tolerance, it seems that the Liberals of today are much less tolerate on dissenting opinions than they used to be; especially during this time of Obama’s Hope and Change mantra.

The Southern Avenger on "The Mexican Flu"

How the news coverage of the swine flu isn’t so much indicative of any serious crisis, but the mainstream media’s corporate and government, PC sensibilities.

Why I will not write a posting attacking Kareem Dale

Yes, I have seen and know about the Video of Kareem Dale expressing his and the White House’s Love for MSNBC.  However, I refuse to write a blog posting attacking the man, and I think if any of my fellow Conservatives had actually watched the video; they would have most likely not have attacked this man in the fashion in which they did.

The Video:

Notice anything overly different about him? No, I am not talking about him being a Democrat…..

The man is stone.friggin’.blind. —– Well, partially blind according to what I have read.

I have a rule, when it comes to blogging, writing and just life in general, and that rule is this; you just do not mock, bad mouth, or generally give a hard time to the handicapped. You just do not do that. I do not care what Mr. Dale said. He is blind, you do not mock the handicapped. If Mr. Dell would have said that he thought President Obama was Jesus Christ; I would feel the same way.

I hate to be the one to say this, but I think my fellow Conservatives need to go back and read books on manners. Because really, we are making our cause look horribly bad, at this point. Yes, I know what liberals did to John McCain during the election; So what? Does that make it automatically okay for we Conservatives, who are supposed to be better than the morally depraved liberals, to mock someone who has a handicap, that he has no control over? Not the last time I checked.

Sorry guys, whoever thought that it would be funny to bring this up, obviously did not look at the tape, and notice that they were about to mock a man, who was, essentially blind.  Sorry to say it; but mocking the President is fair game, mocking his policies is also fair game. But mocking a man who has been blind his entire life, that is off limits in my book.  As someone who has a developmentally disabled aunt, doing this sort of a thing is just god-awfully wrong.

I say this, because on a former blog, that I used to run; before it was hacked. I made one of those sort of mistakes, one so horrible that I do have the stomach to even mention what it was, mostly because I am ashamed of it. Let me just put it to you this way; remember what Ann Coulter said to that disabled vet, that go her tossed off of MSNBC for a long time? Remember what Michael Savage said that got his late night TV program cancelled? Something along those lines. Oh Yeah, I screwed up bad, and made many people angry for it; Mostly Conservatives.  How is it that they now can mock this blind man, and it is okay? I just do not get it.

Anyway, There is my reason for not mocking Kareem Dale. I just wish others felt like I do. Maybe, just maybe our movement would be taken seriously again.

Some Conservatives that need to learn this:: The Atlanticist, Outside The Beltway, PoliGazette, Jules Crittenden, Scared Monkeys, TBogg, Fausta’s Blog, Weekly Standard, Sister Toldjah and Brutally Honest (Via Memeorandum)

Guest Voice: How to Keep Our Kids Out of the "Trench Coat Mafia" by David Cloud

The following is written by a Fundamental Baptist Missionary, David Cloud; of whom a respect greatly. Please, keep this in mind when reading this.  I present this for informational purposes only.  As a disclaimer, the views expressed in this article are not necessarily those of this blog.

Updated April 23, 2009 (first published April 24, 1999) (David Cloud, Fundamental Baptist Information Service, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061, 866-295-4143, fbns@wayoflife.org; for instructions about subscribing and unsubscribing or changing addresses, see the information paragraph at the end of the article) –

On April 20, 1999, two high school seniors filled with occultic hatred murdered 12 of their fellow students and a 47-year-old teacher at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado, before taking their own lives. The shooters also wounded another 20 students, some extremely seriously. At least one has never walked again and others have had long and difficult recoveries.

The Columbine murderers, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, used shotguns, a rifle, a handgun, and pipe bombs in the attack. They laughed as they destroyed and mangled their victims. Witnesses reported that “they were just hooting and hollering, having the time of their lives.”

They had planned to kill hundreds, but their larger bombs did not explode. They rigged bombs out of propane tanks attached to gasoline cans and strung them with nails to enhance the shrapnel effect and placed them in the cafeteria, planning to detonate them when the room was packed with students and teachers at the height of the lunch period. They planned for the ensuing fireball to collapse the second floor onto the lunch room and thus add to the mayhem. They also rigged similar bombs and placed them in their cars and set them to explode 45 minutes after the initial blasts, intending to turn the cars into fireballs that would kill more students, plus paramedics, police, reporters, and others who were responding to the tragedy. By God’s grace, none of the propane bombs exploded.

At least 75 people have been killed on public school campuses since the Columbine shootings. Between 1992 and 2006 there were 330 murders committed by students on school property. The carnage was perpetrated by self-centered, hateful, vengeful, foul-mouthed students.

Early news reports stated that the Columbine murderers were members of a loose-knit group of young people who wore long trench coats, black clothing, and other “gothic” attire and delved into occultic and violent themes, but part of this turned out not to be true. The teens were wearing trench coats the day of the mass murder, but they were not members of the so-called Trench Coat Gang. Early reports also speculated that the boys lashed out at athletes and other popular teens because they had experienced constant bullying and social ostracism. In fact, both boys had a fairly wide circle of friends and were the bullies rather than the bullied, and they did not target athletes or any other particular group. They hated everybody! “Dylan laughed about picking on the new freshmen and [others].  Neither one complained about bullies picking on them–they boasted about doing it themselves” (Dave Cullen, Columbine, 2009, p. 258). Eric went through his junior yearbook and defaced the photos of the majority of his fellow students, labeling them “worthless,” writing that they would die, or making an X over their pictures (Columbine, p. 257).
Continue reading “Guest Voice: How to Keep Our Kids Out of the "Trench Coat Mafia" by David Cloud” →

Football Star and Former V.P. nominee Jack Kemp dead at 73

Some sad news, that I put off blogging about until now. I was not going to even blog about it. Namely because I did not know a thing about the man. So, I won’t pretend that I do.

Here’s a round up of comments about the passing of Jack Kemp:

“Jack Kemp was a leader – whether it was in a football huddle, a national political campaign or a policy discussion about the Austrian school of economics.

“I first met Jack nearly 40 years ago, during his freshman year in Congress. When he introduced The Jobs Creation Act – a major legislative advance of supply-side economics – I knew I had found an ally. That ally soon became my friend

“Jack was a ‘bleeding-heart conservative.’ He wanted to make it possible for every American to succeed and eagerly worked with people of all races, colors and creeds toward that end.

“Across-the-board tax cuts and ‘enterprise zones’ for blighted neighborhoods are now common economic prescriptions – especially during these hard times. But to make these ideas respectable, Jack had to fight for them constantly during his years in Congress, as Housing and Urban Development secretary, as chairman of a national tax reform commission, and during his presidential and vice presidential campaigns.

“He won those fights, and millions benefited. The tax cuts that Jack helped engineer in the 1980s gave Americans unprecedented prosperity for decades. His commission also boldly proposed a national flat tax. Those policies also helped spread freedom around the world.

“I remember standing with him in Moscow’s Red Square in 1990. The Cold War was starting to thaw, but few even suspected that the Soviet Union’s days were numbered. Jack knew. As we stood on the square, in view of the Kremlin, he pointed out an astonishing sign: The line for the new McDonald’s restaurant was longer than the line for Lenin’s tomb.

“Many people will remember Jack as a great football player – and rightly so. But he was also a great player in the world of ideas, with a mind as strong as his arm. I will miss his strength and friendship greatly.” —Edwin Feulner -President -Heritage Foundation

***

For those of us who came of age politically after Reagan was President, Jack Kemp was, if not Reagan, then the next best thing. He was arguably the most consequential and electric conservative between Reagan and Newt. Had Kemp run for President in 1996, I would have been his first volunteer (I missed ’88). Of course, Kemp’s contributions to the cause of freedom long predated that time, having helped Reagan break the grip of an oppressive marginal tax regime. —Patrick Ruffini – Founder – The Next Right

***

The “Kemp-Roth” tax cuts were at the cornerstone of Ronald Reagan’s early legacy as president and his brand of fiscal conservatism and innovative ideas to spur the entrepreneurial spirit were a huge part of the Republican Party of my formative period.  By 1996, when he ran with Bob Dole, has was becoming an outlier in the party because of his relative moderation on social issues like affirmative action (thus the “bleeding-heart” descriptor). – James Joyner – Outside the Beltway

***

As the nation struggles with the trillion-dollar deficits and promises from Democrats to increase the role of government—the very government that got us into this hole in the first place—the ramparts of the free market will not be manned by Jack Kemp. – No Sheeples Here!

***

Jack Kemp, in my mind, was the premier Republican on race relations in American politics. No one spoke to the power of markets and opportunity to empower black Americans as he did. His agenda as HUD Secretary in the first Bush administration would still be light years ahead if its time if applied today. We need more conservatives like him. What a wonderful man, and a great loss to the nation. – Donald Douglas — American Power

***

“A successor to Ronald Reagan who himself has not had a successor. When his cancer was announced earlier this year, Jeff Lord wrote movingly about him and the greatness he had in him. I remember him from several live moments. Once at an American Spectator gala dinner right after the fall of Communism. “Wlady, did you think Vaclav Havel would be president of Czechoslovakia?” he asked from the podium. We always forget what a champion of freedom he was not just at home. Bob Tyrrell had introduced Jack as a perfect specimen of “sound body, sound mind.” Was he ever. I remember him on the floor of the San Diego convention in 1996. He was the announced vice-presidential nominee, basking in adulation and adoring fans. But he shut everyone up around him at that moment, his eyes rapt in attention directed at the podium, where Rep. J.C. Watts was delivering that evening’s keynote. You didn’t mess with Jack when he was in charge. Everyone quickly got quiet and paid attention to Watts too. Jack’s football position was quarterback — but in fact his position was leader. Even at the small Saturday Evening Club dinner he once attended as our guest, where he felt called upon to tell other guests when to come to the table and where to sit. He couldn’t help himself. Wherever man still wants to breathe freely, his memory will remain cherished. Jack Kemp in all his splendid energy will be terribly missed.” —  Wlady Pleszczynski – The American Spectator

***

“He was a true gentleman and a great sportsman” – Charles Johnson – Little Green Footballs

***

Kemp had the courage to move beyond the usual issues for conservatives, choosing to work on poverty and housing issues, and challenging his fellow conservatives to make conservatism work across the board.  It’s one of the reasons why Kemp will be missed. — Ed Morrissey – HotAir

****

Didn’t agree with him on many core issues, but he was a GOP institution with a wonderful family. – Michelle Malkin

***

At a time when conservatives are trying to find their way ideologically and rhetorically, they would do well to emulate this most happy and principled warrior. He will be greatly missed. — Jennifer Rubin – Commentary Magazine’s Contentions

***

Kemp and those around him liked to explain his political outlook in part by reference to his encounters with racial segregation while a professional football player.  Kemp found it stomach-turning that his black teammates were denied whites’ accommodations in the South simply on account of their race.  In this, as in much else about him, there is a great deal to admire.  It helps to account for the fact that in the 1980s, many were happy to consider ourselves Kemp supporters—and thought him far the best candidate for president in 1988. — Kevin R. C. Gutzman – Taki’s Magazine

So, there you have it. The round up of voices on the man. May He Rest in Peace and My Prayers to the family.

Update: Right on Schedule, The far lefty loons are attacking this man with fury. See here and here. I guess they had to sleep it off first. But, there you go…. The tolerance and civility of the Democrat Party. You see now, why I’ll never vote for another Liberal Democrat? Amazing. 🙄

Video: Laura Ingraham and Gloria Feldt yell at one another about Miss California Carrie Prejean

I don’t watch this stuff, because I do not much care for Laura Ingraham; her screechy harpy nasally voice makes my stomach turn. However, she does deserve a few points, i think, for putting this idiot feminist liberal bitch in her place.

Personally, I think the castigation of Miss California Carrie Prejean by the liberal left is just wrong. But the demagoguery of position of both sides, is just maddening.

I won’t watch it, but it’s good for hits, I suppose.

(H/T Jeff G)

The Obligatory Supreme Court Justice Souter To Retire Posting

Only reason I am posting about this now, is because it broke last night and I was busy with other things.

Supreme Court Justice David Souter is planning to retire at the end of the current court term.

The vacancy will give President Obama his first chance to name a member of the high court and begin to shape its future direction.

At 69, Souter is nowhere near the oldest member of the court. In fact, he is in the younger half of the court’s age range, with five justices older and just three younger. So far as anyone knows, he is in good health. But he has made clear to friends for some time that he wanted to leave Washington, a city he has never liked, and return to his native New Hampshire. Now, according to reliable sources, he has decided to take the plunge and has informed the White House of his decision.

Factors in his decision no doubt include the election of President Obama, who would be more likely to appoint a successor attuned to the principles Souter has followed as a moderate-to-liberal member of the court’s more liberal bloc over the past two decades.

via Supreme Court Justice Souter To Retire : NPR.

Most people on the right are saying that this guy was not much of a Conservative, so this might not be that big of a deal anyhow. However, it does change the balance of the Government. It tilts the SCOUTS to a more liberal court. Which has some on the far, far, right quite upset. The question is, what will President Obama do? Will he appoint a hyper-uber-Liberal to the seat, or will he appoint a moderate to the seat? Either way, it will be interesting to follow.

Personally, I do not believe that the court is going to go balls out totally liberal. If anything, there will be a ever so slight lean towards a liberal court. But there are enough Conservatives still in the court to keep a Conservative voice up there. So, I think any panicking at this point is just abject foolishness.

Others: SCOTUSblog, Top of the Ticket, protein wisdom, , Don Surber, Hot Air, Wake up America Jules Crittenden,

The Charles Johnson, Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller feud…. A Follow up

This is a follow up to a posting that I made a while back about the running feud between Charles Johnson against Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller and a few other players.

I realize that no matter how I phrase this posting; someone is going to be offended or is going to hate me to the point of wanting to see my death. I mean, in this sort of a damned thing, you cannot win. If you say anything that one of the parties dislikes, you will be smeared and forced to take a side in the argument. When I lost my other blog to a hacking job; by somebody who was angered about comment that I made about a person on another blog, which was a horrific misstep on my part, which I did and still do readily admit. I made a promise to myself, that I would never engage in Blog wars or any other sort of nonsense.

However, I believe it is important to be clear where I stand; and because of this, I am going to make my feelings clear…

I was contacted by Dr. Robert Spencer about my initial posting. We discussed what I wrote and how I phrased my posting. He did ask me some very pointed questions and I answered honestly, I commend him for writing and asking. Because of this I feel the important need to clear the air.

It appears that Charles Johnson is playing a little game; a deadly game, that hurts people, smears them and makes them into something that they are not. This, I am afraid is wrong. That game is called “guilt by association.” This is a game that liberals play, especially when they are trying to further their agenda of identity politics. It appears that Mr. Johnson is now trying to smear Pat Buchanan, he seems to believe, for whatever foolish reason; that Pat Buchanan is an Anti-Semite. This is nothing more than a classic liberal smear. That’s right, I question the very idea that Charles Johnson is even a Conservative.

For the record, I have zero against Israel, Jews or Judaism. I do however, reject the Zionist movement, on Biblical theological basis only. (See 2 Corinthians 6:14-18) I have Zero against those who choose to practice Islam. However, I reject Islam as a false religion, and those who practice it, as lost and in need of Salvation, that comes only by Jesus Christ. The same goes for those who reject Christ and follow strictly after of the Law of Moses. (See John 14:4-11 and John 10:22-38 and Galatians 3:6-18)

Now, I will be the first to admit that some of the postings over at Pamela Geller’s Blog are, at times, borderline hysteria and could be interpreted by some as Anti-Islamic. However, for Charles Johnson to simply smear someone, because they are associated with a particular group is, in my opinion, unfair and is borderline libelous. I suppose that someone like me would be labeled Anti-Semite by Johnson as well, because of my issues with the Zionist Movement and its influence on the foreign policy of United States. If that is the badge that Mr. Johnson wants to hang on me; fine, I will wear it, I make no apologies for thinking and believing that the Capital of the United States of America is Washington D.C. and not Tel Aviv, Israel. If the Neo-Conservative and Liberal thought police want to try and smear me on this one, fine.

While my initial posting might have sounded like I was praising Charles Johnson, I was not, at all. It was simply lamenting the fact that people, who are supposedly opposed to Islamic fascism, were engaging in a bitter feud. However, since that posting, it seems that Charles Johnson wants to go after people like Michelle Malkin and others, who are in support of the combating of Terrorism and Islamic Fascism. This is totally unacceptable, and I hereby reject Charles Johnson as an enemy to America and a Liberal.

Pamela Geller may not like me, because of my position on Zionism. However, I stand for Freedom of speech and against the Liberal thought police. Hopefully, she understands.