August 28, 2008

The Party of the Forever War

Robert Novak (who, I thought, was retired) is reporting that John McCain really, truly wants to pick Democratic Sen. Joe Lieberman as his vice president:

Reports of strong support within John McCain's presidential campaign for Independent Democratic Sen. Joseph Lieberman as the Republican candidate for vice president are not a fairy tale. Influential McCain backers, plus McCain himself, would pick the pro-choice liberal from Connecticut if they thought they could get away with it.

Meanwhile Karl Rove tries to get him to take boring old Mitt Romney, and tried to talk Lieberman into withdrawing his name. Fox News says:

"a well-placed Lieberman source told FOX News that Rove did call Lieberman toward the end of last week and said something to the effect of: I love you, but I think it would be a disaster if you were chosen as vice president. According to the source, Rove said, “You should call McCain and tell him that,” to which Lieberman laughed. Lieberman did not call McCain, the source said."

Come on, John, don't be a wimp and merely pick Lieberman. Go all the way! Follow your heart. Show the world that the Republican Party of the United States of America now stands for one thing and only one thing:

Pick Netanyahu.

My published articles are archived at -- Steve Sailer


Darayvus said...

"whom I thought was retired" - who retired Novak? Did they use a hook?

Shirley you mean "who, I thought, retired".

Just a nitpick, but the who/whom thing is an annoyance.

Anonymous said...

"Come on, John, don't be a wimp and merely pick Lieberman. Go all the way! Follow your heart. Show the world that the Republican Party of the United States of America now stands for one thing and only one thing:

Pick Netanyahu."

I gotta tell you Steve, this one cracked me up. And you think, you're not funny?

Anonymous said...

I understand you jest, Steve. But Netanyahu would actually be far more tolerable to the American right than Lieberman would be. He's a social conservative and his rhetoric is pro-free market.

I know that Lukid-bashing is vogue among paleocons, but a McCain/Netanyahu ticket would not contradict the Republican Party's (recent) values.

Anonymous said...

Netanyahu? You mean the guy who gave Hebron to Arafat?

Would this be the Netanyahu who represents the "Likud" (the favored codeword for "hard-line" Israeli policies, conveniently forgetting that the Likud was responsible for the expulsion of Gaza's Jews) or the Netanyahu who mysteriously rose from nowhere to become the darling of the CFR crew?

Seriously, Steve...In your zeal to find "Jews" or "Israelis" responsible for so much of what ails the world, you demonstrate a laziness of thought that belies any actual insights you may happen to stumble upon.

Anonymous said...

You've been getting mighty uppity of late.

Anonymous said...

Netanyahu is too competent. McCain should pick John Podhoretz so his VP doesn't outshine him.

Anonymous said...

"or the Netanyahu who mysteriously rose from nowhere to become the darling of the CFR crew"

Netanyahu didn't mysteriously rise from nowhere, he had a dead brother as a step stool.

Anonymous said...

After 9-11, Netanyahu was lecturing, er, testifying before Congress and suggested that they beam Hollywood products into Iran. He suggested stuff like Melrose Place would be helpful. That was after Netanyahu kindly stated, just days after 9-11, that it wasn’t true that America was attacked because it supported Israel, but instead that Israel is attacked because it supports America. You gotta love “friends” like Bibi Nutty-yahoo.

mnuez said...

Yeah, you got McCain pegged. The welfare of Jews is his solitary concern. Makes sense to me!

As for Netanyahu, I think HIS care for Jews is just a bit lower than McCain's. These people are dirty little politicians who would trip over themselves to sell their mother for just a little bit more fame and fortune.

A TR/Begin ticket though (with Gandhi as Secretary of State) would be totally badass awesome.

Anonymous said...

I'll take Mitt, the boring white guy with the ginormous I.Q.

Anonymous said...

If McCain is elected it won't matter whether he picked Lieberman for VP or not, Lieberman will still be his go-to guy on foreign policy issues.

Anonymous said...

Why can't America produce one friggin' satire magazine? I ask because I read a great story on Lieberman in Spy magazine years ago. Imagine the number they could have pulled on Obama (this is a magazine that ran an upskirt cover of a (well endowed) Hillary, remember).

Liberman comes across about as sincere as Obama. Romney FTW. Netenyahu? Hours after the 9/11 attacks I saw him interviewed. He had the "Greek sprinter" look in his eyes, pupils dilated to the size of hubcaps. Said something about how America was attacked because they hate our freedom.

Anonymous said...

Seriously, Steve...In your zeal to find "Jews" or "Israelis" responsible for so much of what ails the world, you demonstrate a laziness of thought that belies any actual insights you may happen to stumble upon.

Ah, fair's fair. There's a bright clear line between jewbaiting and, well, not jewbaiting, and Steve doesn't cross it.

If Jews want disproportionate influence then they better learn to live with the flak it draws.

I'll take Mitt, the boring white guy with the ginormous I.Q.

No, no, no, no, no - for the love of Aladdin, no! Please don't pick a (nominally) anti-amnesty VP. That'll only make it harder for those of us who want immigration sanity to vote against him. Give us a chance to send a clear message - pick Lindsay, please...or Vicente Fox.

J said...

Well, Netanyahu grew up in America, has American university degrees and is an American citizen, so he could be an American VP. However, he has decided to dedicate his life to Israel and Zionism. He is not available. You will have to do with what you have or import a VP from la Rep├║blica Dominicana, Ecuador or some other country with surplus politicians.

Anonymous said...

McCain should pick Pastor Manning. He'd bring the house down at the Republican convention.

Anonymous said...

How about Ariel Sharon? He's been in a persistent vegetative state for 2 years or so, and neocons would identify with that.

Anonymous said...

I recently read a news article that mentioned in passing that Lieberman was unavailable for comment on something or other because he was in the Republic of Georgia at the time. I almost laughed outloud. Taking time from his busy schedule inciting a war with Iran to work on bringing a war with Russia a little bit closer. And all this while there are still US tropps in Iraq. And Afghanistan. And I'm sure he feels strongly about "democracy" (hahahahaha) in dozens of other places, some of which I've probably never even heard of, but which have offended Israel in some way, or which are refusing to allow immoral, dysgenic Hollywood crap or traditional family-wrecking feminism or whatever into their borders.

Anonymous said...

Amen to commenter "international jew." It's posts like these that disappoint me the most on iSteve, of which I am a daily reader. Steve, you are so full of insight and so free of ideology on so many issues. But unfortunately this is not one of them. It is no surprise that your snide tone in posts like these departs so markedly from your cool-headed norm.

Anonymous said...

Might I suggest Ariel Sharon instead? He has a long history of ambitious and aggressive warmongering which would satisfy McCain, he has been almost (but not quite) as Zionist in his outlook as Lieberman, and his current level of brain activity would carry on the proud tradition of McCain's "good friend" George W Bush.

Anonymous said...

If you wonder why some people think you have an issue with Jews, re-read this post of yours. What do Lieberman and Netanyahu have in common besides being Jews? Netanyahu is free-market reformer with an MBA from MIT. His reforms as finance minister have led to several years of 5%+ economic growth for Israel and a soaring stock market and rising currency. The only thing Lieberman and Netanyahu have inh common is that they are both pro-Israel, but that is true of McCain as well. America has a significant minority of evangelical Christians, and because of this will always be pro-Israel. Deal with it.

Anonymous said...

So, Steve, when are you going to talk about Palin? Seems she's got balls.

Anonymous said...

THIS IS MY COMPU .............

(Senor Doug)

Seamus said...

Well, Netanyahu grew up in America, has American university degrees and is an American citizen, so he could be an American VP.

But he hasn't been a resident of the U.S. for the past 14 years (see Article I, section 1, clause 5 of the Constitution, made applicable to the Vice President by the 4th clause of the 12th Amendment).

Anonymous said...

Fun fact: A few years back there were rumors floating about that Italian PM Berlusconi had offered Netanyahu the job of Finance Minister of Italy. Seriously

Anonymous said...

You'd think paleos would be a bit more sympathetic to Likud, as they draw on the same tribal principles. (Or is "tribal principle" a contradiction in terms?) Oriental Jews prefer Likud because they know what Arabs are like-- just as Democrats have supported gun control for 200 years because they know what blacks (and immigrants) are like.

Interesting that Rove would prefer Romney to the other contender, Tim Pawlenty. Remember, Rove flew into Minnesota in 2002 and basically ordered Pawlenty and Norm Coleman to switch races. Which they did. Someone wanted the cosmopolitan Coleman in the ├čenate rather than hometown Tim.

So McCain chooses a mate from a place as distant and alien as Israel, and who shares a name with a celebrity, albeit a British one. Michael Palin began and ended his documentary "Full Circle" in Alaska.

Anonymous said...

"Pick Netanyahu."

Funny, yes, but I think the party of perpetual war would still exist without what you see as the instigators. Now that there are people who have adopted this strategy, there are any number of circumstances which could illicit a similar response.

What interests me most is the military angle because I see how it dovetails with the pro-Amnesty forces. I wonder how the military using psych ops tactics to sway public opinion at home might find it convenient to have those who resist mass illegal immigration (an unlimited supply of soldiers as well as cheap labor) labeled as racists/neo-nazis. We aren't under martial law but enough ex-military including families would create a vast network. So if you were to run afoul of the status quo on Amnesty what you would ultimately be guilty of was preventing the military from having access to what amounts to foreign mercenaries. I don't have proof except in a pattern I've seen in my own interactions. Do military and ex-military view their loyalties as God, Military (& potential military) then Country?

Perhaps you should widen your net, Steve.

P.S. There is always propaganda during war. I guess the TV outlet would be FOX. Blogs, definitely not this one ; ). And, radio which has always been standard for such operations.

Anonymous said...

Perhaps Netanyahu would be a good choice, if making Netanyahu vice president came as a package deal with the immigration of the six million jews today living in Israel to the United States.

Think about it - the six million jews now living in Israel are likely to be natural Steve Sailer supporters if they move en masse to the United States. They will certainly understand the need to prevent any muslim immigration to the US. They probably will understand the problems of bi culturalism or multi culturalism - they will want the US to maintain a strong European culture.

With all due respect, it seems that many of the posters here are frustrated with our fellow americans. We feel that the majority of our fellow americans are complacent about for example, the risk that the spanish speaking population of the Southwest US will attempt to break off a piece of the US and merge it with mexico. Israelis have seen the problems that come from having a dis satisfied minority - they will want no risk of this in the US.

Finally, once there are no Israelis left living in the Middle East, i think that all Jews in the US will quickly want to wash their hands of the region. There will be no reason for them to push the US to intervene militarily in the region.

once the majority of the jews in America are former israelis, and if you accept that these former Israelis will be assertively against the immigration of unskilled folks to the USA, the rest of the US Jewish community might abandon its traditional support for mass unskilled immigration.

So a move of all the jews of Isreal to the USA could advance many of the interests near and dear to those of us who read this blog.

Once Israel no longer exists as a jewish country perhaps many American jews will become active supporters of paleoconservatism, VDARE, and Steve Sailer.

Would they be welcomed as allies by the movement?

Anonymous said...

I don't see how reasonable paleo can object to Sarah Palin, especially considering the alternatives.

Anonymous said...

Anybody know anything about Sarah Palin?

Anonymous said...

He he,

Anonymous said...

Duh Steve -- conflict will always be with us. "Only the Dead have seen the last of war," etc.

The Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which is Russia, China, and the 'stans, announced in Beijing that Russia should withdraw completely from Georgia, including S. Ossetia and Abkhazia.

A huge slap in the face to Russia, which had joined the organization to get close to China and maintain an anti-US alliance.

How many think China weeps for Georgia?

China needs cheap oil/gas, the Georgia play is Putin's move to keep it high (nix the pipeline). China also has huge fears on Russia's play, with the idea that it might be repeated in Tibet, or XianXing, or among the Hui (huge rebellion there in the 19th Century to establish a Muslim nation), to keep China occupied and out of Siberia.

This has nothing to do with the US, rather the conflict over oil/gas prices, and the "unfreezing" of the "frozen in place" conflicts after the break-up of the USSR.

Palin, Lieberman, it doesn't matter -- that conflict, including lots of nations not America, will go on regardless.

Palin's probably a good choice, since she picks up Hillary supporters, is strong on oil/gas exploration-exploitation in Alaska, anti-corruption, etc.

And I will note -- the Israel-China connection is non-existent. If China upbraids Russia over Georgia, proof positive that this is about a lot more than "neocon" conspiracies, holding of whacked out conspiracy theories is the sign of a weak mind.

Anonymous said...

Vicente Fox.

Mark ftw. You just named the guy McCain's been tossing and turning nights, wondering whether or not he's a better choice than Lieberman.

Anonymous said...

Well, he picked the governor of Alaska, a woman.

I'm sure this move will move millions of women voters over to the Republican side.

Anonymous said...

He picked a white anglo chick. So you guys will have to hold off on the neocon/Zionist/Jew-bashing, and engage in some misogyny instead (which is not to say we all don't know who really controls our foreign policy).

Anonymous said...

Oh, I completely agree with the second anonymous (from the top). Netanyahu is a pretty good guy compared to most American politicians. Pro-free-market, pro-strong-defense, etc. I also suspect he would sneer at American-style political correctness. He's not my favorite person in the world (that would Ron Paul ... *cry*), but he's not in the same league with Mournful Lieberman and his gang of holier-than-me "liberals".

Palin seems interesting. Alaskans seem like a lot of libertarian and/or paleo-leaning conservatives, in general. Also, she's better looking than the gent at the top of ticket (superficial but perhaps important!) And finally, the republic Pres and Veep nominees can hug each other in public without yeeking everybody out - try that, Dems!

Anonymous said...

"Pick Netanyahu."

That's a classic, Steve. I love it. Instead, McInsane picks a 44-year old nobody of limited experience, married to some approximately white guy claiming an Eskimo identity, with a child with Down's Syndrome. Which means the child will grow up smarter than her running mate, which is something, at least.

TGGP said...

Bibi would be better than Joe, but since he wasn't born in America he couldn't take office as President. Same with Arnold Schwarzenegger.

KlaosOldanburg said...

Ah, fair's fair. There's a bright clear line between jewbaiting and, well, not jewbaiting, and Steve doesn't cross it.

I agree 100%. And I think it's a bit odd that people with such fragile sensibilities would read isteve. I mean, it was a comically absurd joke. I thought it was hilarious.

According to wikipedia, the VP must:

- be a natural born U.S. citizen
- not be younger than 35
- have lived in the U.S. for at least 14 years

I think we need a constitutional amendment disqualifying people w/dual-citizenship. Or better yet, an amendment abolishing dual-citizenship.

Anonymous said...

I'll add, the Forever War is of course unavoidable. One thing Steve and the Paleocons like Pat Buchanon ignore is the nuclear proliferation issue, which allows Pakistan (100 nukes +) and other weak/non-states the ability to kill American cities, mixed with the loss of fear of American retaliation, deniable proxies, and the internal dynamics.

Osama was not stupid, he just operates on a different set of assumptions. He wants to rule Saudi Arabia, and seeks to overthrow the corrupt regime (and install his own corruption) by gaining mass support. By killing lots of Americans. Yes, he's evil. But not stupid. Killing lots of Americans with impunity was the whole point of 9/11, and why AQ has consistently gone for the "big" rather than drip-drip-drip "small" attacks directly against America or European nations.

The whole point is gain support inside Saudi Arabia -- Bin Laden's model is the 1979 bloody Mecca Mosque takeover.

That makes selecting a President who will articulate a clear policy of deterrence critical, the stakes are not "national survival" BUT the loss of major American cities. It will only get worse when Iran goes nuclear as it will, and the same power-dynamics play out there (whoever nukes America and gets away with it wins total power there).

Nuclear Weapons + tribal power rivalries = Forever War. The form might vary, it might be cold, it might be hot, but it's sure as heck war. And as the gun-grenade battle between Chinese police and Muslim Jihadists in XianXing during the Olympics proved, it's not just America either.

Anonymous said...

"Zimri said...

Just a nitpick, but the who/whom thing is an annoyance."

Not when they are used properly. Who in the nominative case, Whom in the dative case. Technically, Whom should be used in the accusative case as well, although in current usage Who can be used, and it often sounds more natural.

Anonymous said...

Palin's choice is very, very smart. McCain is not brilliant, I still have many issues, but he's experienced where Obama is not (excepting Black Nationalists and Rich White Marxists).

Palin is hugely appealing to the PUMAs, the Party Unity My A**, Hillary supporters who are saying (in their forums at least) they'll vote for McCain/Palin.

Palin has a blue collar / frontier attitude, ala the endless History / Discovery Channel shows like Tougher in Alaska, Deadliest Catch, Ice Road Truckers, Ax Men, etc. She is a lifelong NRA member, gets the NRA enthused about turnout, owns a small trucking company and owned a fishing boat. Supports drill here / now.

The pick plays up the elitist, snob, Rich White Yuppie + Condescending black nationalist mixture of Obama and Biden.

The Media is mourning.

Women get an attractive and engaging personality -- anti-corruption activist, fought against her own party on Bridge To Nowhere, hunts, fishes, beauty queen, kept her Down's syndrome baby. Social conservatives get someone opposed to gay marriage, abortion, gun control, etc.

With a heaping helping of drill here, now, which anyone who saw those Alaskan themed shows pencils in as not only cheaper oil/gas but good paying jobs (though tough ones).

The appeal to macho, "I can be tough" attitudes promoting blue collar jobs at home is a golden one, and one Obama cannot match because his Pelosi-allies who depend on blocking stuff here for their money and power, will veto any attempt on that front.

A smart, professional pick. Not Lieberman, Romney, Pawlenty, but Palin. One done, I might add, as as surprise.

So much for Robert Novak.

Anonymous said...

What do Lieberman and Netanyahu have in common besides being Jews?

You just conflated Jewishness and Israel-firstism.

Anonymous said...

Get ready for some cognitive dissonance, Paleos: Both Bill Kristol and your resident neocon, Testing99, like Sarah Palin.

Anonymous said...

"I think we need a constitutional amendment disqualifying people w/dual-citizenship."

I'm pretty sure when Bibi became Prime Minister of Israel he was forced to give up his American citizenship. Has there ever been a president of US with two citizenships?

Anonymous said...

Quote: "A front-page article yesterday about a television debate in the Israeli election campaign referred incorrectly to the citizenship of Benjamin Netanyahu, the Likud candidate. He renounced his American citizenship in the early 1980's."

Anonymous said...

Vicente Fox.

But that's really the point, isn't it? If Steve had instead said: "Show the world that the Republican Party of the United States now stands for one thing and only one thing: Pick Fox" - would anyone have objected? Would anyone be frantically calling LULAC and La Raza to summon up a protest march?

Good God, people, grow up!

"Help, we're Jews - we're being oppressed!"

Not in this country: 13 senators, 2 Supremes, 30% of the Forbes 400, ad nauseum.

So your granddaddy couldn't go to Harvard? Neither could lots of people's granddaddies.

Anonymous said...

"You'd think paleos would be a bit more sympathetic to Likud, as they draw on the same tribal principles."

Im sure they are sympathatic, but white people arent allowed to show tribal solidarity with each other - its practically illegal.

Anonymous said...

Testing99 - why is it that you always insist on spelling Buchanan's name incorrectly?

It has to be deliberate. You used to to it as 'Evil Neocon', its why I, for one, assume you are the same person.

Is it some sort of neocon secret handshake?