WarSclerotic

To me, Obama’s behavior and statements are perfectly understandable in light of the Torah. Firstly, we need to understand Ishmael in the Bible from whom the Arabs are descended, and they even admit it. The Bible says of Ishmael, “he shall be a wild man and his hand shall be against every other man’s hands.”

The Torah tells us that Abraham had a righteous son, Isaac, and a wicked son Ishmael. Similarly, Isaac had a righteous son, Jacob, and a wicked son, Esau. It is said of Esau that he was “ruddy,” red-haired, red symbolizing blood, violence, strictness and harshness in an evil way. Only with Jacob’s sons were there no wicked sons and only of Jacob does the Bible say, “his bed was complete.” Hence, it was Jacob who was worthy of being the father of the sons from whom came the 12 tribes of Israel.

Why? Because Abraham inclined to the side of kindness. Isaac inclined to the side of strictness, severity. Only Jacob properly blended these two concepts, which is the actual truth, and that is why he became the actual father of the 12 tribes. But this was before the giving of the Torah on Mount Sinai. Each of them carried out their purpose appropriately. That is why these 3 patriarchs are called the “merkava” or “chariot,” that is, a “vehicle” for G-dliness, a vehicle together, collectively.

For instance, if we give a child too much we spoil the child and if we are too strict we crush the child. Same with society, unrestricted leniency, liberalism carried to an extreme, can be bad. Same with the opposite, unrestricted severity can also be bad, crushing, fascist. Only when properly blending these do we get to the “truth.”

Precisely because each of the 3 patriarchs had a particular inclination, they were tested with the opposite, to see if they worshipped G-d only for that quality or truly out of love of G-d. Hence, since Abraham’s natural inclination was kindness, he was commanded to do the opposite, sacrifice his son Isaac, and only at the last moment did G-d stop him. Same with Isaac, he was forced to do things that were kind in a way that was not his natural inclination. Jacob and his mother Rebecca saw that Esau was wicked and could not be allowed to become the father of the Jewish people, despite his being the eldest, so they deceived Isaac, the opposite of acting truthfully, so that Jacob got Isaac’s blessing, not Esau. Jacob was tested in that he had to do something against his nature, he had to be untruthful. Jacob put on animal skins his mother prepared, so that he seemed hairy like Esau. Isaac, who was at that point blind, sensed that something was amiss, that he was holding Jacob, not Esau, due to his voice. But though confused, he gave the blessing of peoplehood to Jacob nevertheless. At that point Isaac made the famous statement, “The hands of are of Esau but the voice is of Jacob.” Sometimes we must use the tough hands of Esau or the pure voice of Jacob will never be allowed into this world. That is why native born Israelis are called a “sabra,” a cactus, which is tough on the outside but tender on the inside.

Having said all this, because Abraham’s unrestricted kindness is not the ultimate truth, there is room for the opposite. Hence he had a righteous son, Isaac, but also a wicked son, Ishmael, from whom come the Arabs.

In Kabbalah we speak of “klipa,” a “shell” that can cover over G-dliness just as the shell of a nut can cover over and obscure the fruit within.

Ishmael represents “klipa of kindness,” the shell covering up kindness, or the flip side of kindness. It’s not real kindness. That is why the Torah says of Ishmael, “He shall be a wild man and his hand shall be against every other man’s hand.” Why does the text refer to “hand”? Because normally the hand represents kindness, giving charity. Ishmael takes that kindness and perverts it, he uses his hand against other men’s hands. Similarly, we see that the Arabs are all fighting each other. They even use this quarreling as a part of their life force. They use their DISUNITY as an excuse: We have to give in to them because they are under pressure from the EVER PRESENT HARDLINERS, on whom they blame everything. Obama is doing the same thing, caving in to Rouhani on the fantasy that he is under mysterious pressure from the hardliners, but don’t worry, deep down we know Rouhani has good intentions!

Does this make kindness, from whence comes liberalism, inherently wrong? No. We saw that Joseph became viceroy over Egypt and instituted huge granaries to store up grain against the day when the king’s dream would be fulfilled, that there would be famine in the land. Joseph’s actions involved taxation and could be considered the first Federal Reserve, modulating the economy to assure survival and stability. And for the record, Joseph’s action made Egypt vastly wealthy, because when the famine hit thousands came to Egypt to buy grain. Because of Joseph’s “Federal Reserve,” Egypt became a fabulously wealthy superpower.

Understand. G-d is not a Democrat. He is also not a Republican. G-d is G-d! And whatever He tells us, that is what we must do. G-d did not look into Karl Marx’ “Das Kapital” when He wrote the Torah. He also did not look into Adam Smith’s “The Wealth of Nations.” A lot of people from BOTH parties can’t handle this.

Deep down, Obama thinks that by being against killing he is somehow following what the Bible is all about. In fact, the Bible never says, “Thou shalt not kill.” What The Ten Commandments say IN THE ORIGINAL HEBREW (Exodus 20), is “Lo teertzach,” “Thou shalt not MURDER.” If I wanted to say, “Thou shalt not kill,” that would be “Lo taharohg.” The Bible never says “Lo taharohg.” Because some killing is necessary. Hence Moses himself killed people. Moses slew an Egyptian man who was killing a Hebrew man, one of his brethren.

Similarly it says just 2 chapters after The Ten Commandments, in Exodus 22:1, “If a man be found while crawling under your house and he be smitten so that he die, there shall no blood be shed for him.” In other words, if someone is crawling under your house to break in, you do not have to hand him an American Civil Liberties Union questionnaire to find out his deep inner outer upper under intentions and you shall not be punished on his behalf if you kill him. No one breaks into a man’s home which will surely be defended, unless he comes prepared to kill. Therefore, you can assume he is a threat to your life and you can kill him. On this verse the Talmud comments in Brachot 58a, “If someone comes to kill you, rise early and kill him first.” This is Biblical law.

The problem is not that Obama is a liberal, there are liberal policies that are beneficial. The Lubavitcher Rebbe praised America as a “medina shel chesed,” a “realm of kindness.”

Where Obama and some liberals go wrong is that they often can’t tell the difference between kindness and the klipa of kindness. We have to be kind, right? Okay, let’s be kind to Ishmael. Because otherwise, WHAT WOULD PEOPLE SAY????? It’s not the kindness, it’s the perversion of kindness that is Obama’s problem.

Is this because he’s too stupid to chew gum and walk at the same time?

Yup.

He can’t tell the difference between genuine kindness and klipa of kindness. Some of his policies are genuinely kind in a positive sense. It’s just that he and the nitwits he has brought into government can’t tell the difference between genuine kindness and klipa of kindness. One of the things Obama did NOT do was bring “the best and the brightest” into government as President Kennedy had.

So Obama’s people assume that SINCE we have to be kind, THEREFORE we have to be kind to the most malevolent Muslims, including Iran.

This is also why Obama is incapable of going to war, the opposite of kindness. The problem is not that he is a liberal or a conservative, a Democrat or a Republican. There are some Democrats who are vehemently opposed to his Middle East policies. It’s that Obama can’t tell the difference between true kindness and fake kindness.

If you look back in history you will see some great progressive Democrats like Bobby Kennedy, John Kennedy, and even Lyndon Johnson. Johnson produced all the great social legislation even while escalating the war in Vietnam. Kennedy laid the groundwork for that legislation, even while standing up to the Russians in the Cuban Missile Crisis. Read “Thirteen Days” by Bobby Kennedy and you will se that the way we got the Russians to back down was Bobby Kennedy’s idea.

But can you imagine Obama creating a genuine naval blockade of Iran the way Kennedy blockaded Cuba? Of course not. Obama basically has the sense and values of a gum popping teenager.

Even President Clinton, with whom I have a great many disagreements, sent in cruise missiles to try to kill Osama.

But Obama? He reportedly did NOT kill Osama and Hillary Clinton and Leon Panetta had to actually do it behind his back. Just look at the photo of Obama in the White House Situation Room during the operation against Osama. He looks absolutely petrified, like he is ready to hide under the desk. This is also why he voted “present” over and over while a legislator in Illinois. Obama has deep, deep, deep character flaws.

Obama is thoroughly lost and I do not put him in the same category as some of the great American progressives. Obama is on a gigantic 1960s hippie ego trip and those around him think they’ve got it all figured out.

How did he get there? Is he really a Muslim? I doubt it. He dumbly spent years attending a church led by a radical minister who was certainly no Muslim. But Obama has been exposed to and influenced by the Muslim culture he grew up in, with a father who was a Muslim. His mother was not, as far as I know. One can be INFLUENCED by the kliipa of kindness without actually being a Muslim or Arab. I think he’s sympathetic to them.

I think this is at the heart of it.

In this sense I draw a strong distinction between Obama and many other Democrats. The shame is that Democrats are NOT trying to stop Obama on his suicidal Middle East policies, and that is a great shame, but predictable. Members of the party of a sitting president usually don’t stand up to him. This was also true of Republican presidents who sold out Israel, and Republicans on Capitol Hill were quiet as mice. If Obama were a Republican, Republicans on Capitol Hill would be quiet as mice right now. By the way, George W. Bush wouldn’t let Israel bomb Iran either.

Reagan was something of an exception. When Israel bombed the Iraqi nuclear plant, Reagan was privately pretty sympathetic, saying “Well, boys will be boys.” Unfortunately, everyone around Reagan was determined that Israel had to be punished, including then Vice President George Herbert Walker Bush.

If you want an interesting read, read John Loftus’ and Mark Aaron’s massively documented “The Secret War Against The Jews.” They show that EVERYBODY was against Israel, Democratic presidents, Republican presidents, EVERYBODY. Aside from Reagan one isolated exception was President Kennedy, the first president to sell arms to Israel, Hawk missiles. Everybody else, behind the smiles, stabbed Israel in the back. Oliver North wrote in his book that he was astounded at how anti-Israel were so many in the US military and foreign policy bureaucracy. Hostility to Israel is not confined to one party.

This is why it is so treacherous that Israelis are so obsessed with relying on the US to save them. No one in either party is going to actually stop Obama and Obama has been selling out Israel for years and the Republicans haven’t made much of a stink about it either.

And meanwhile, Netanyahu keeps trying to win approval from the US which is never going to come, instead of bombing Iran. After all, WHAT WOULD PEOPLE SAY?!

The truth is that thinking is hard. People would rather follow paradigms than actually think. They follow the liberal rule of thumb or the conservative rule of thumb but THEY DON’T ACTUALLY THINK because that uses up too much metabolic energy. People are stuck in their paradigms. As Shakespeare wrote in Hamlet,

“The single and peculiar life is bound with all the strength and armor of the mind. It is a massy wheel fixed on the summit of the highest mount, to whose huge spokes ten thousand lesser things are mortised and adjoined.”

In other words, we cling to our paradigms tenaciously. Thomas Kuhn wrote in “The Structure Of Scientific Revolutions” that even scientists can cling to ideas even after they have become outmoded or disproven.

We don’t want to think. Neurologically genuinely thinking about what’s right is resource-intensive. We would much rather ask, “What does my liberal ideology tell me to think?” or “What does my conservative ideology tell me to think?” “What should I do? I know. I’ll look into my liberal crystal ball” or “I’ll look into my conservative crystal ball.”

There have been very anti-Israel and anti-Semitic Republicans in bygone years. Democrats don’t have a monopoly on this. Only what G-d’s Torah says is perfect. Rabbi Nachman, the Breslover Rebbe, said that all the evils of the world can be traced to misplaced kindness and unwarranted fears. Fear and kindness are not inherently bad. It is their MISPLACEMENT that is the problem. Thus, G-d rejected King Saul and replaced him with David because Saul showed too much kindness to the evil Amalekites. Thus the Midrash, an ancient Torah text, comments on this in Midrash Rabbah, Kohelet 7, “He who is merciful to the cruel is destined to be cruel to the merciful.”

The Talmud in tractate Pirkei Avos also tells that the actual straw that broke the camel’s back and made G-d destroy Sodom, more even than their homosexuality, was their laws against kindness and charity. In Sodom it was actually illegal to give charity. A girl there had mercy on a poor person and gave him bread. The people of Sodom seized her, smeared her body with honey and tied her to a roof where she died a horrible death, struggling against swarming bees. This was the final straw that angered G-d and caused him to destroy Sodom.

Once you let purely secular ideologies run your life and think for you, sooner or later you wind up doing pretty ridiculous things.

That, in my opinion, is Obama’s big problem. He doesn’t think, he lets his ideology think for him. And that is why it is almost impossible to get through to him.