The American Spectator : The Spectacle Blog : Palin to Visit Israel

Text Size

On Sunday, Sarah Palin will travel to Israel along her with husband Todd. They are expected to stay for about 48 hours. Amongst other things, Palin will visit with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and visit the Western Wall in Jerusalem.

Prior to her arrival in Israel, Palin will speak at a conference in New Delhi, India.

Palin has long been an admirer of Israel. When she was Governor of Alaska she kept an Israeli flag in her office. It is also not unusual to see Palin sporting a lapel bearing both the American and Israeli flags. She has also frequently criticized President Obama for his policies towards Israel particularly where it concerns Israeli settlements. Not only does not she not agree with a settlement freeze she believes there should be an expansion. It was one year ago yesterday that Palin called upon the Obama Administration to reset its relations with Israel after they embarked upon a row with Israel over settlement construction in East Jersualem. Consider her words of wisdom:

Once again, the Obama Administration is missing the boat on a very, very important issue. They need to go back to basics and acknowledge Palestinian leaders have not progressed any peace process since President Obama was elected. As Israel makes concessions (and is still criticized by the Obama Administration), Arab leaders are just sitting back waiting for the White House to further pressure Israel. The Obama Administration needs to open its eyes and recognize that it is only Iran and her terrorist allies that benefit from this manufactured Israeli controversy.

Amen to that.

View all comments (56) | Leave a comment

Smirking Weasel| 3.17.11 @ 11:15AM

If the woman is so concerned about a foreign nations' circunstance, perhaps she should give up her American citizenship and become a citizen of that nation.

NoLib| 3.17.11 @ 11:29AM

At least Sarah Palin is a citizen. She even has a real birth certificate.

Mike | 3.17.11 @ 3:30PM

So does the President and that is what really galls you. Doesn't it?

NoLib| 3.17.11 @ 4:36PM

Prove it, because he hasn't.

waltc| 3.17.11 @ 11:51AM

That is such an idiotic statement. The President of the United States should be concerned with all of our allies. Particularly the ones that are loyal allies no matter what we do or say about/to them and their enemies.

Are you honestly suggesting that any politician that speaks in favor of one nation over another should move there? Or is that just your attempt at bashing Gov Palin for speaking?

Mike W| 3.17.11 @ 12:36PM

"reliabel allies, no matter what we say or do to them"... like when we allow them spy on us, or when we allow them to bomb Navy ships and kill US sailors. I guess when it comes to Israel, American military members are expendable.

My favorite thing that we do to them is when we allow their surrogates in the USA push us into pointless wars in the Middle East.

Are you people sane? I don't hate Israel and I am not anti semitic. They should look out for themselves. The USA should look out for the USA and only the USA. The first poster had it right - if Palin is going to put Israel on the same level as the US then I don't want that goofy bitch running for my presidency.

Occam's Tool| 3.17.11 @ 2:06PM

We are in a fight against a group of people that want to take away our freedoms. Israel is in that same fight, against the same people (who have attacked us for reasons unrelated to Israel, by the way---the Iranian hostage thing had nothing to do with Israel). You want as many solid allies as you can get in a war. George washington, it should be pointed out, may have said what he said---but he accepted help from The FRENCH.

Occam's Tool| 3.17.11 @ 2:06PM

Sorry, Washington. Caps.

wodiej| 3.17.11 @ 2:56PM

Apparently you are not sane or you wouldn't have written something so stupid.

According to you everyone should just look out for themselves. Ok, if someone is beating you and robbing you, you should just be left to fend for yourself without the aid of the police or passerbys.

You're thought process is ignorant and so is your vulgar choice of words.

Mike | 3.17.11 @ 3:31PM

Hear, hear.

George Washington| 3.17.11 @ 12:49PM

"Observe good faith and justice towards all Nations; cultivate peace and harmony with all. Religion and Morality enjoin this conduct; and can it be, that good policy does not equally enjoin it?... In the execution of such a plan, nothing is more essential, than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular Nations, and passionate attachments for others, should be excluded; and that, in place of them, just and amicable feelings towards all should be cultivated. The Nation, which indulges towards another an habitual hatred, or an habitual fondness, is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. Antipathy in one nation against another disposes each more readily to offer insult and injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and to be haughty and intractable, when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur. Hence frequent collisions, obstinate, envenomed, and bloody contests. The Nation, prompted by ill-will and resentment, sometimes impels to war the Government, contrary to the best calculations of policy. The Government sometimes participates in the national propensity, and adopts through passion what reason would reject; at other times, it makes the animosity of the nation subservient to projects of hostility instigated by pride, ambition, and other sinister and pernicious motives. The peace often, sometimes perhaps the liberty, of Nations has been the victim.

So likewise, a passionate attachment of one Nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite Nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest, in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter, without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite Nation of privileges denied to others, which is apt doubly to injure the Nation making the concessions; by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained; and by exciting jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld. And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens, (who devote themselves to the favorite nation,) facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.

As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent Patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practise the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the Public Councils! Such an attachment of a small or weak, towards a great and powerful nation, dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter.

Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens,) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake; since history and experience prove, that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of Republican Government. But that jealousy, to be useful, must be impartial; else it becomes the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a defence against it. Excessive partiality for one foreign nation, and excessive dislike of another, cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots, who may resist the intrigues of the favorite, are liable to become suspected and odious; while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests.

The great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign nations, is, in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connexion as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop." ~ The Father of this Country

Unhinged Interventionist| 3.17.11 @ 12:52PM

This George Washington character is obviously a raging anti-Semite! Everyone knows that speaking about "passionate attachments" and "foreign influence" is code.

simon templar| 3.17.11 @ 4:09PM

Do you know what a habit is? It is like when a knee jerk liberal keeps saying the same thing over and over when it makes no sense at all and he has forgotten why he said it in the first place. It is a unthinking habit and no one remembers the basis or reason for it. Washington is saying that these types of alliances and relationships with certain nations need to be avoided...the ones that turn into habits that have no basis in common interest and justification or inducement to maintain them. I apologize for your poor public education. If only we had a voucher system then you could have been taught how to read and think critically by a private institution.

Mike | 3.17.11 @ 3:35PM

Why are you confusing the good people at AmSpec with what our first President actually said instead of what they think he should have said?

simon templar| 3.17.11 @ 3:59PM

Mikey, I thought I had told you to clean out your desk? I am sorry but you do not meet the basic standards of a troll. We have requested another from the Huff and Puff. He is starting this coming Monday.

simon templar| 3.17.11 @ 3:37PM

So likewise, a passionate attachment of one Nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite Nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest, in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter, without adequate inducement or justification.
This is classic case of misrepresenting a quote from a founding father like Jefferson's so-called writing on the seperation of church and state to justify ridiculous positions and policies that are actually in conflict with our constitution and interest. Read it carefully. It says "passionate attachments' that contain no common interest that are based on illusions are to be avoided. Ones that are based on some thin veneer or thin shallow association are to be avoided. It does not exclude strong alliances with countries that have real common interest and adequate justification towards our mutual protection and survival. Israel and the US do share a common interest and are destinies are intertwined. There is plenty of justification as we share a common enemy that is hell bent on our mutual destruction.

Red Phillips| 3.17.11 @ 5:43PM

"towards our mutual protection and survival"

How, prey tell, does our alliance with Israel help our "protection and survival?" Our perceived excessive allaince with Israel brings us grief.

simon templar| 3.17.11 @ 6:15PM

Does Big Satan and Little Satan ring a bell? We are going to get grief and have gotten grief for two centuries from these fanatics with or without Israel. Please..there is no excessive alliance with Israel. We have been trying to help them survive, yes, but we have been plowing billions of dollars into its surounding enemies countries as well for decades. If we are going to have an honest discussion then all the facts, history, and reasoned arguments must be included.

Red Phillips| 3.17.11 @ 6:42PM

"towards our mutual protection and survival"

Honestly simon, most people I talk with about this subject don't really even make the case that Israel does something for us. They more likely make the case that we have some sort of natural responsibility/obligation toward them, whether as a fellow democracy or for some Christians based on theological considerations.

We will certainly get grief from certain factions with or without our support of Israel, but it is undeniable that our perceived excessive fidelity to Israel is one of the causes of Muslim resentment toward the US. To deny this is willful ignorance.

What would be in the best security interests of the US would be to disengage from the region and adopt a neutral stance toward Israel and her neighbors, and to restrict immigration from certain designated countries.

If it is as you say that some have a natural antipathy towards us regardless of what we do, then doesn’t that make the case as well that we are best served by minding our own business over hear and letting them stew in their hate over there?

If you disagree with this, you do so because you want the US to protect Israel, and you should be honest about that. Not pretend we have mutual interests that compel it.

tj| 3.17.11 @ 12:46PM

No your the one that needs to leave... Are we a little isrealafob! Get a life troll

wodiej| 3.17.11 @ 2:51PM

Despite your comment being void of a constructive thought I feel compelled to give you the benefit of deeper insight. Perhaps you will be able to process it for something useful like becoming more knowledgeable.

Israel is an ally to the US. Gov. Palin cares about our allies and maintaining a good, respectful relationship with them. Especially since they are about the only ally we have in the Middle East. She cares about this country and about other peaceful nations-that is why she is concerned.

There that was simple enough.

Red Phillips| 3.17.11 @ 11:52AM

Whether Israel expands or freezes its settlements is none of the business of a US President and they should stay silent about it one way or the other.

Mike W| 3.17.11 @ 12:30PM

It's our business in that we provide economic and military support for Israel. Quit providing my tax dollars to them and I don't care what they do.

Red Phillips| 3.17.11 @ 12:35PM

"Quit providing my tax dollars to them"

Exactly. That we should end foreign aid to every country should go without saying on a conservative website.

NoLib| 3.17.11 @ 4:46PM

But that's the rub, Red: You're principled and believe ALL foreign aid is problematic. Fair enough.

The only time I hear others' anti foreign-aid rants is when it pertains to Israel. You may not be anti-Semitic, but many of them are.

Occam's Tool| 3.17.11 @ 11:59AM

That's useful to some degree, Red, but a Security Council resolution that passes sometimes demands US military backup. Personally, I do not think it would be useful to isolate internationally a country with 200 nukes.

Red Phillips| 3.17.11 @ 12:38PM

But OT, we shouldn't be in the UN.

Occam's Tool| 3.17.11 @ 2:01PM

I agree. But, again, Washington was giving advice to a small and weak country, following Machievellian principles, not the fabulously rich and powerful nation we have become. Israel is actually a bargain in terms of benefits to the US.

Occam's Tool| 3.17.11 @ 12:03PM

I do, however, support the expansion of the Settlements.

Ken (Old Texican)| 3.17.11 @ 12:28PM

Doctor,
don't let the cat out of the bag...yahear?

PhilTheCapitalistPig| 3.17.11 @ 12:26PM

I have a proposal as a solution to this quandary. Tell the palestianians they can buy back the land they sold to the jews for the same price they sold it for, add inflation and interest, and they can't use U.S. foreign aid dollars to do it.

If they wanted the land so bad, then why did they sell it in the first place?

Its kind of like the black dirt in Iowa, people thought it was worthless, so they sold it for dirt cheap (no pun intended), and now the sellers want the land back after they see the value in it.

Mike W| 3.17.11 @ 12:29PM

Palin goes to Israel. She is a non-issue. Her lack of intellectual depth has made her irrelevant, so why should I, or anyone else care if she goes to Israel?

tj| 3.17.11 @ 12:47PM

Mikey!~ Mikey! Mikey.. then why do you trolls keep talking about her? Duh!

Redbrightandtrue| 3.17.11 @ 1:49PM

Mikey why are you even here?
PS: It's not "your" presidency and if she's such a "goofy b*tch" why not let her run and prove herself the fool some GOPers and the super lame media keep telling us she is?
Oh and use your misogynistic filthy word(s) elsewhere.

NoLib| 3.17.11 @ 4:48PM

Bet Mikey's a real peach to the women in his life.

wodiej| 3.17.11 @ 2:59PM

Then why are you here commenting about it?

Liberals change the subject, ignore the facts and call names. Congratulations, you qualify.

simon templar| 3.17.11 @ 3:53PM

He is an idiot. Mikey's got nothing to offer but snarky remarks. You are fired, Mikey. I am calling Soros and the Huff and calling for a replacement troll.

Ken (Old Texican)| 3.17.11 @ 12:32PM

Folks,
I think it is wonderful that Sarah is visiting in Israel.
I've been there for extended lay-overs and vacations .
Any decent person would "love" those knotheads.

Honest to goodness, they kept making me think of the "whack-jobs" inhabiting the Alamo during the siege thereof.

mzk1| 3.17.11 @ 1:13PM

Ken, I wish we were like that. I wish the U.S. was still like that. But thank you.

Anybody notice why Sunday and Monday? That's the holiday in the book of Esther, regarding the hanging of a guy who tried to exterminate all of the Jews. Somewhat Apropos, I would think.

Once again, Palin's strongest asset is her detractors.

wodiej| 3.17.11 @ 3:05PM

"Once again, Palin's strongest asset is her detractors." I agree. They have unknowingly revealed to her their strategy.

Baffling| 3.17.11 @ 5:30PM

What's that strategy, to ridicule her publicly when she makes herself look ridiculous? Yeah sprung. Ouch. Now watch her take advantage of having discovered that playbook.

I wouldn't hire someone for any job who, in an interview, was asked "name a newspaper you read", couldn't and then claimed the question was a biased hit piece on them.

You think the dilemmas faced by a President in competition with the rest of the planet's political and economic interests are tougher or not?
OMG the Chinese are biased against me. Yes, yes they are. And they're not going to change if you whinge about it.

Baffled?| 3.17.11 @ 5:50PM

What did Palin do to make herself ridiculous this time? Did you even read the original post?

Your knee-jerk Palin Derangement Syndrome is in full bloom.

simon templar| 3.17.11 @ 6:06PM

Well..it's better than whining about it and then going playing a round of golf and voting present. Or maybe she could say one thing, change her mind several times back and forth and then vote present (hint, ask an Egyptian about this one). Or how about just doing nothing but pretending like you are (oil spill, hint). Will we have to hear about that interview for the next century. Is that all you got?

Baffled?| 3.17.11 @ 6:14PM

Why don't we all just take off and go to Rio? Sounds like a blast to me.
I mean nothing else of concern is going on in the world right now anyway, right?

Redbrightandtrue| 3.17.11 @ 1:51PM

Darn, looks like I just fed a troll. Sorry guys.

I personally am thrilled that Palin is going to Israel to meet with Netanyahu. Sorta makes all those Rove-ian claims that she lacks 'gravitas' whither away doesn't it? I mean, the PM of Israel often meets with private citizens....amirite?

Jack| 3.17.11 @ 1:54PM

You can only admire a people with such determination and faith. The comparison to the beseiged in the Alamo is spot on. They are surrounded by enemies but they endure.

wodiej| 3.17.11 @ 3:03PM

Despite the dismissive comments, this is an important and worthwhile trip for Gov. Palin. The arrogance of some posters that we should not be helping anyone but the US is pathetic. Ever hear the saying "there but for the grace of God go I?" No one has ever helped any of you? Right....

Perhaps the lack of compassion and concern for fellow human beings is why the US is in the dire straits that it is with the deep decline in morals and just being a decent person.

Mike | 3.17.11 @ 3:37PM

Palin to visit Israel. Aren't they suffering enough already?

simon templar| 3.17.11 @ 3:48PM

Cute. That's all you got? Lame, cheap, small, incoherent snarky shots. Do you want to me to help you again? You know you really need to do this yourself. Ok. Here goes. As a liberal, I certainly understand the right of a free people to exist in peace but I also believe that they must..fill in the blank. You could say somehing about UN resolutions about borders..the need to respect boundaries at this time..something to that effect. Look I can not do all the thinking and heavy lifting for you that you refuse to do.

NoLib| 3.17.11 @ 4:49PM

The troll's a punk and a pervert--the perfect democrat.

Baffling| 3.17.11 @ 5:16PM

Could she be the only person on this planet who thinks Israeli settlements are a manufactured controversy?

You can support or oppose them, however you simply cannot believe that they were uncontroversial until someone decided to trick the entire planet to make them controversial because they were bored when there was nothing on TV.

This is long, long way beyond not being able to name the leader of Pakistan or not being able to describe the differences between Sunni and Shiite. This is where you're made to sit in the corner at a UN assembly because the rest of the world's leaders with brain cells are talking.

Seriously, why is Bangladesh always complaining about flooding?

simon templar| 3.17.11 @ 5:57PM

The rest of the world leaders at the UN with brain cells? Are you sure you have any? You got to be kidding? This is the same group that created Israel in the first place and then pulled UN peace keeping out of the Egyptian border area to allow them to attack Israel. This is the same institution that said nothing in three consecutive wars against Israel, failed to come to its aid when attacked, and then called for a cease fire after they won the wars and demanded that THEY return land fought and died for with their blood back to their attacking enemies. Who says Palin thinks it not a controversial issue? You are just another ignorant troll who knows nothing but what the politburo tells you. If you want to know more about Bangladesh..try this novel idea..look it up, educate yourself with several sources besides the Huff and Puff.

Baffling| 3.18.11 @ 3:35AM

"The rest of the world leaders at the UN with brain cells? Are you sure you have any?"

I'm sure that someone who wasn't aware Israeli settlements were controversial has none.

"....allow them to attack Israel.... three consecutive wars against Israel, ... when attacked, ... cease fire after they won the wars..."

These wars you mention... while you're talking about specific outcomes and the impacts of them, if you had to stop that and explain to someone why a "war" might have been controversial for one side, would you regard that person as a moron or not? Hey, welcome to the point.

"Who says Palin thinks it not a controversial issue?"

Palin says this. As per the quote of her saying that, posted here.

"You are just another ignorant troll who knows nothing but what the politburo tells you."

I'm quoting what the author of this website decided to publish. Take his Communist tendencies up with him if you like.

"If you want to know more about Bangladesh..try this novel idea..look it up"

You're missing the point. Nobody on earth is unaware of the answer. So next time the UN discusses this, if they have to stop and explain to the 1 person on earth who doesn't understand why flooding is a problem, well, lol.