Author Archives: admin

Changing the Language of Public Discourse: The I-ARI Institute

Prof. Paul Eidelberg

Israel is trapped in the defeatist and self-effacing rhetoric of contemporary public discourse. I am happy to report, however, that with the help of some very talented and politically astute colleagues in Israel and America, I have founded the Israel-America Renaissance Institute, and one of its functions is to overcome this lethal character of contemporary public discourse. What’s wrong with it?

It’s boring, its weak, and it allows the enemy to set the terms and rules of engagement. Its rhetoric of “peace,” “security,” and “democracy” is self-effacing. The word “peace” appeals to the weak, people who fear violent death. Fear of violent death is most prominent in regimes that have forsaken their spiritual ideas and ideals—regimes steeped in materialism where the Mall and the sports arena have taken the place of the church.

The “peace” people seek in such regimes means nothing more than comfortable self-preservation­—security plus commodious living. Peace and security have become the shibboleths of the declining secular democratic state.

Israel’s government fixates on security. Its timid and pedestrian politicians emphasize security because there’s nothing controversial or distinctively Jewish about this mantra. Security is the legitimate concern of any country. You don’t have to think out of the box. But has Israel’s fixation on security made her more secure? Has it elevated and energized Israel’s morale—the first ingredient of a nation’s ability to defend itself? I don’t think so.

Security is not a defining national goal, one that distinguishes Israel from any other country. It’s not a positive goal that inspires people with national pride. It doesn’t strengthen our ancient faith and fighting spirit.

The one thing lacking in Israel is a goal that systematically invigorates the nation’s collective memory and political creativity, that enhances her identity as the world’s one and only Jewish commonwealth—the nation that gave mankind the Book of Books, the Torah. Yes, it was the Torah that liberated men and nations from idolatry and paganism. It was the Torah, by its lapidary sentence in Genesis that man is created in the Image of God that elevated humanity and proclaimed the moral unity of the human race denied by Islam. This should be Israel’s message, conveyed quietly, as on cat’s paws.

While Islam’s arrogant leaders trumpet Allah, Israel’s leaders should unpretentiously refer to God’s sacred Covenant with the Patriarchs and quote the benign teachings of Isaiah and other prophets. They should softly remind Jews and Gentiles of the centrality of Eretz Yisrael, both in God’s Covenant with the Patriarchs and in the teachings of the Prophets, and they should project a partnership of Jews and Gentiles in building the Jerusalem Temple. Nor is this all.

Israel’s leaders should speak and act in a manner that does justice to what Gentile scholars and statesmen have said about the Jewish People, for example by Harvard graduate John Adams, the second President of the United States and perhaps the most learned of America’s Founding Fathers, who fondly declared: “The Jews have done more to civilize men than any other Nation. They are the most glorious Nation that ever inhabited the earth. The Romans and their Empire were but a bauble in comparison to the Jews. They have given religion to three-quarters of the globe and have influenced the affairs of Mankind more, and more happily than any other Nation, ancient or modern.”

Of course this praise should be said to Jews, but it will be heard abroad, and it will inspire Israel’s Christian friends and perhaps make Muslims stammer and stutter.

Further, Israel’s leaders should sometimes quote the presidents of America’s colonial colleges, such as Ezra Stiles of Yale and Samuel Langdon of Harvard, who were learned in Hebrew, conversed with Rabbis, and regarded the Hebraic Republic of antiquity as an excellent model of government. In fact, prominent Catholic and Protestant Hebraists in Europe praised the laws of the Hebraic Republic as the wisest and most just in history. The great English polymath and Hebraist John Sheldon proposed that Britain scrap its parliament and substitute the Sanhedrin!

Surely discreet references to such historical facts would enhance Jewish national pride on the one hand, and disconcert Israel’s enemies on the other. And it will also bolster Christians in America harassed by the politically-motivated atheism currently sweeping that country—with the encouragement of a post-American president whose left-wing supporters are undermining the American Constitution and trashing what Lincoln deemed the heart and soul of America—her theologically inspired Declaration of Independence.

I have virtually finished a book on the subject, showing that Christian Hebraism profoundly influenced America’s foundational documents, and I believe Israel owes it to America to help her restore her ancient faith. This is a major purpose of the Israel-America Renaissance Institute (I-ARI) mentioned earlier and which I am currently heading.

We shall have more to say about our Institute in future articles. But I want to reiterate one of its goals: to change the subversive language of contemporary public discourse, as we have begun to do in this article. We want to encourage Israel and America to go on the ideological offensive against the enemies of our God-given rights to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness—immutable rights proclaimed in America’s Declaration of Independence whose authors were educated in colleges that emphasized Hebraic studies in order to better understand the Bible of Israel.

The Israel-American Renassaince Institute website is at http://i-ari.org.

Annual “Pull for the Kids” Truck & Tractor Pull scheduled for June 25 at the Greene County Fairgrounds

(XENIA, OH) The Greene County Combined Health District (GCCHD) is holding its annual “Pull for the Kids” Truck and Tractor Pull on Saturday, June 25th at the Greene County Fairgrounds. This event is a fundraiser for the Greene Community Health Foundation. The philanthropic arm of GCCHD, the Greene Community Health Foundation raises and manages gifts on behalf of the Health District. The generosity of our donors allows GCCHD to continue the commitment to offer quality healthcare to Greene County residents in need regardless of their ability to pay.

An antique tractor pull will begin at 10 a.m., a kiddie tractor pull at 3 p.m., and the big modified tractors and trucks begin at 5 p.m. For those interested in entering a truck or tractor, entry fees range from $1 to $20, depending on the entry. Cash prizes will be awarded for the winners in each division. General admission is only $5.00 per adult and children ages 10 and younger are free. Lots of family fun, food and drinks are on tap for all ages.

This event is sponsored in part by the Old Timers Club, Greene County FFA Alumni, Barker’s Towing, Greene County Dailies, Farm Bureau of Greene County and NAPA Auto Parts. For more information, please contact Carol Sue Knox, Development Assistant at 937-374-5658 or by email at cknox@gcchd.org.

Greene County Combined Health District – Your center for public health services and health information in Greene County for over 90 years.

Maternal Depression: Helping Mothers, Helping Children

By Marian Wright Edelman

Ellie Zuehlke and her husband had expected the birth of their long-awaited first child to be one of the happiest moments of their lives-until, somehow, it wasn’t. Instead, Ellie experienced severe postpartum depression that left her unable to care for their newborn son. To thousands of mothers, Ellie Zuehlke’s story will sound sadly familiar. Ellie, a health care industry professional, was ultimately lucky. Though some mothers lose health care coverage shortly after giving birth, Ellie had health insurance and access to a qualified mental health provider and was able to get help quickly. As she explains, “Because I received prompt, appropriate treatment after the birth of my first son, we were able to greatly reduce the negative impact of my depression on my son. In addition, I was able to get the care I needed to prevent depression after the birth of mysecond child.”

Today, Ellie is enjoying her family life and two sons, now seven and two years old, who are healthy and happy. Ellie shared her story with the Children’s Defense Fund-Minnesota (CDF-MN) staff, who were studying the effects of depression in families like hers for their new report “Maternal Depression in Early Childhood.” CDF-MN found that undiagnosed and untreated maternal depression is not only dangerous for a mother but can have long-term harmful effects on her children.

As the report explains, “Infants and toddlers are very vulnerable to the effects of parental depression because of their total reliance on their caregivers. A growing body of research is documenting that the foundation for future brain development is laid down during the earliest years of life. Adverse childhood experiences can disrupt that process with lifelong consequences if untreated. ‘Unaddressed depression can seriously impair a parent’s ability to respond to her newborn in a nurturing way,’ says Terrie Rose, founder and Executive Director of Baby’s Space, an early learning center in Minneapolis. This can harm a child’s cognitive, physical, social, and emotional development, beginning early in his or her life. ‘As a result, lower responsiveness, sleep problems, and more negative emotions can be seen in infants as young as six months.'”

These risks continue to accumulate. By toddlerhood, children are at elevated risk of behavior and emotional problems and delayed language development; by early childhood they are at elevated risk of learning difficulties and conduct disorders and are already more vulnerable to depression themselves. By adolescence they are at higher risk of depression, learning and anxiety disorders, and substance abuse. CDF-MN cites a finding by the National Center for Children in Poverty that “maternal depression and anxiety is a stronger risk factor for child behavior problems than smoking, binge drinking, and emotional or physical domestic violence.” CDF-MN estimates that in Minnesota one in 10 babies is born to a mother experiencing serious depression during his or her first year of life-nearly 14,000 Minnesota mothers and infants in 2009-and every untreated case of maternal depression in the state costs a minimum of $23,000 a year primarily from lost productivity and higher health care costs for mother and child.

The good news, as Ellie Zuehlke knows first-hand, is that maternal depression is treatable. “Fortunately, we know a great deal about how to help mothers and families struggling with depression before or after a baby’s birth,” Helen Kim, a psychiatrist and director of a women’s mental health program at a Minnesota medical center, told CDF-MN. “We can also identify mothers who are at higher risk of experiencing depression than others and offer assistance before they get pregnant or give birth.” CDF-MN found that Minnesota has some good policies, effective programs and practices, and innovative providers that help prevent or reduce the incidence of depression and its negative effects. But many of the policies are not fully implemented and several programs operate on a small scale. Too often the mothers most at risk-poor mothers, young mothers, and mothers of color-are the ones least likely to receive help. Much more must be done to raise awareness about maternal depression and the importance of addressing it.

In Minnesota, as in many other states, the difficult economic times are making maternal depression and depression in other caregivers worse. “Unfortunately, some of the state’s budget cutting actions have increased the risk factors associated with depression, especially for low-income parents,” says Marcie Jefferys, CDF-MN’s Policy Development Director. Reduced access to postnatal health care, public assistance policies that push families with newborns deeper into poverty, lack of child care assistance for low income working parents, and cuts in county mental health programs are all among recent budget cuts that increase family stress, which is tied to higher rates of depression. I hope this important new report will sound the alarm for policymakers across the nation that cutting crucial programs and services has devastating impacts on our most vulnerable mothers and children and causes lifelong harm. States should be investing today in effective programs that identify at-risk mothers and help them get the treatment they need. Everyone-mothers, children, and the state’s bottom line-will benefit tomorrow.

Click here to view the full report.

Marian Wright Edelman is President of the Children’s Defense Fund whose Leave No Child Behind® mission is to ensure every child a Healthy Start, a Head Start, a Fair Start, a Safe Start and a Moral Start in life and successful passage to adulthood with the help of caring families and communities. For more information go to www.childrensdefense.org.

Pro-Abortion Legislation Introduced, Targets Pro-Life Healthcare Professionals

(Columbus) – Planned Parenthood and pro-abortion legislators gathered at the Statehouse today to promote the so-called “Prevention First Act”. The bill would force pro-life pharmacists, religious hospitals and pro-life taxpayers to provide or subsidize the morning-after pill despite religious or moral objections. The legislation would also require persons who took and adhere to the original Hippocratic Oath to violate its requirement that “I will not give to a woman an abortive remedy”.

“The abortion industry, yet again, attempts to characterize this recycled legislation an effort to prevent unintended pregnancies. In fact, it will prevent the exercise of freedom of conscience,” said Mike Gonidakis, Executive Director for Ohio Right to Life. “Violating the conscience rights of health care professionals could force some people to leave the profession, and ironically, decrease access to health care, rather than increase it,” said Gonidakis.

Although proponents claim requiring the provision of “emergency contraception” will decrease unintended pregnancies and abortions, a January 2007 Obstetrics & Gynecology study by leading proponents of the drug found that increased access to “emergency contraception” had not reduced the rates of abortion or unintended pregnancy.

Further, the so-called “Prevention First Act” would require hospitals to provide misleading information stating that “emergency contraception” does not cause an abortion or interrupt an “established” pregnancy. Pro-life Ohioans oppose the morning-after pill because it sometimes ends the life of a human embryo after fertilization by preventing implantation.

Ohio Right to Life expresses its opposition to the legislation for its blatant disrespect for the rights of pro-life Ohioans, and for its failure to respect the dignity of life by forcing increased distribution abortion-causing drugs.

The GOP Presidential Race, and Sarah Palin?

The Republican race for presidential nomination is gaining momentum. According to a recent Ramussen Poll, Mitt Romney leads the pack by 33 percent. Tea partier Michelle Bachmann is gaining on him. Right now, she has 19% of the polled votes. Not far behind Bachman is Herman Cain.

I think Michelle Bachmann is the better candidate. Both candidates have substantial business experience, but Romney is a stuffed suit. His is filled with political jelly, which no doubt keeps him afloat. He rides the waves of the political waters to his political advantage. His tossed-in-the-wind record also has benefited left-wing party agenda.

Did I forget to mention Bachmann is better looking than Romney?

Surprisingly, a majority of Tea Partiers favor shifty Mitt and not TP candidate Bachman. Of those polled by Ramussen, 36% favor Romney and 26% prefer Bachmann. It is tempting to think that the poltically savvy Tea Partiers could possibly be duped by shifty Mitty.

While Tea Partiers favor Romney–the past loser, they also Smarty Sarah should run for president again. Even she is better looking than Romney too, a majority of non-Teas Partiers seem to think a run for the presidency by Palin would hurt Republican chances to regain the White House.

What do they know, anyway?

<strong>Sources:</strong> <a href=”http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2012/election_2012_presidential_election/romney_bachmann_cain_lead_the_pack_among_gop_primary_voters” target=”_new”>Romney, Bachmann, Cain Lead The Pack Among GOP Primary Voters</a>  Ramussen Reports June 16, 2011 and <a href=”http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2012/election_2012_presidential_election/45_of_gop_primary_voters_say_it_s_bad_for_party_if_palin_enters_presidential_race” target=”_new”>45% of GOP Primary Voters Say It’s Bad for Party If Palin Enters Presidential Race</a>  Ramussen Reports June 16, 2011

Smarty the Sarah

By Jim Robbins

Sarah Palin’s critics routinely mock her intellect, so when the state of Alaska released 24,000 emails she wrote while serving as governor, “AOL Weird News,” an offbeat component of AOL.com, had a representative sample analyzed to see how well she wrote. They expected the results to confirm their anti-Palin bias, but they were in for a surprise.

Far from being an illiterate bumpkin, the standard Flesch-Kincaid readability test showed that Ms. Palin’s emails were written at an 8.5 grade level. This was “an excellent score for a chief executive,” AOLWN reported. To put some perspective on this number, Martin Luther King’s August 1963 “I Have a Dream” speech — much more heavily edited than Ms. Palin’s emails — ranked at 8.8 on the same scale, while Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address came in at 9.1.

A study by Smart Politics on the readability ratings of recent State of the Union addresses also showed Ms. Palin in good company. President George H.W. Bush’s average SOTU score was 8.6. Bill Clinton came in at 9.5. Ronald Reagan, who like Ms. Palin was heavily criticized by liberals and regarded as a doddering old fool, logged an impressive 10.3 rating. And George W. Bush, who earned even more left-wing contempt than Mr. Reagan, if that’s possible, edged the Great Communicator with a10.4 ranking.

Then there is President Obama, heralded as the smartest president and the most gifted orator in living memory, but whose 2008 “Yes we can!” victory speech came in at a comparatively anemic Flesch-Kincaid  rating of 7.4. Some numbers just speak for themselves.

James S. Robbins is senior editorial writer for foreign affairs at the Washington Times. His latest book is “This Time We Win: Revisiting the Tet Offensive,” published by Encounter Books. He can be contacted at jrobbins@washingtontimes.com.

Gallup: American Public is Pro-Life

By David E. Smith

A new national opinion survey reveals growing support for the pro-life viewpoint on the subject of abortion. That survey, conducted by the Gallup Organization, shows a decisive majority believe that unborn children should be protected under the law.

Sixty-one percent of those surveyed said they believe abortion should be illegal in all circumstances or legal only under certain circumstances. Thirty-seven percent of respondents believe abortion should be legal under all circumstances or most circumstances.

Under the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton decisions, abortion is currently legal in the United States under all circumstances.

Support for providing legal protection to preborn children was consistent regardless of age or gender. Sixty-one percent of men and 60 percent of women said all or most abortions should be illegal. Pro-life views were also expressed by 59 percent of those in the 18-34 age category, 58 percent of those aged 35-54, and 64 percent of those over the age of 55.

In its analysis of the results, the Gallup Organization provided this assessment: “The results make it clear that, despite their labeling of their own abortion views, a majority of Americans clearly not only oppose abortion and believe it to be a morally improper ‘choice,’ but they believe the legal status of abortions should change, and all or virtually all abortions should be prohibited.”

The Gallup organization even offered the pro-life movement some advice: “Pro-life groups need to educate Americans on what constitutes a pro-life position — and to encourage them to call themselves pro-life when they want all or almost all abortions made illegal.”

First published by Illinois Family Institute (June 18,2011) where David Smith Executive Director.

Research Reaffirms Traditional Understanding of Gender

By Lauren Funk

NEW YORK (C-FAM) New research reaffirms that gender is grounded in the biology of men and women, supporting the traditional understanding of gender agreed on by the international community.

UN delegates are receiving copies of the research at a time when debates about “gender identity” are heating up: member states are engaged in a contentious vote on the issue at the Human Rights Council this week and they are preparing for a battle on sexual orientation and gender identity during this fall’s General Assembly.

“The Psycopathology of Sex Reassignment Surgery,” a peer-reviewed article authored by Richard Fiztgibbons, Phillip Sutton, and Dale O’Leary, questions the medical and ethical implications of performing sexual reassignment surgery (SRS).  The authors approach the issue from the medical and biological perspective that human gender is a matter of genetic composition, explaining that “sexual identity is written on every cell of the body and can be determined through DNA testing.  It cannot be changed.”

The authors affirm that biological sex cannot change, and they renounce the concept of “gender identity,” or the idea that gender, as a social construct or personal perception, is separate from one’s biological sex.  Citing the work of psychoanalyst Charles Socarides, they explain that “there is no evidence that gender identity confusion – a gender identity contrary to anatomical structure- is inborn.”

The article acknowledges that there are genetic abnormalities that can cause discordance between genetic sex, hormone receptivity, and sexual organs.  However, those who seek SRS are virtually always genetically normal men and women with intact sexual and reproductive organs and hormone levels proper to their sex, the paper says.  In these cases, according to the authors, “when an adult who is normal in appearance and functioning believes there is something ugly or defective in their appearance that needs to be changed, it is clear that there is a psychological problem of some significance.”

The authors argue that individuals who claim to have a “gender identity” contrary to their anatomical and biological structure cannot resolve their issues through SRS.  Individuals who find it difficult to self-identify with their biological sex often suffer from more serious psychological problems, including depression, severe anxiety, masochism, self-hatred, narcissism, and the results of childhood sexual abuse and troubled family situations. These individuals experience social and sexual difficulties as a result of these disorders and negative experiences, not because they were born into the “wrong body,” the paper says.  Sexual reassignment surgery, because it proposes a surgical solution to deep psychological disorders, is categorically inappropriate – and thus medically and ethically unsound, according to the authors, and those individuals who undergo SRS continue to have “much the same problems with relationships, work, and emotions as before” their surgery.

The study discredits the “gender identity” as a social construct, and it reinforces international consensus that gender is defined “traditionally” as “men and women” in the context of society.

<em>This article first appeared in the Friday Fax, an internet report published weekly by C-FAM (Catholic Family &amp; Human Rights Institute), a New York and Washington DC-based research institute (http://www.c-fam.org/). This article appears with permission.</em>

President Obama – No, He Can’t!

By Yoram Ettinger
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4082463,00.html, June 15, 2011

President Obama pressures Israel to adopt his initiative, which is based on the 1949 cease fire lines, including the repartitioning of Jerusalem and land swaps. He implies that Israeli rejection of his initiative would undermine US-Israel relations, while advancing Palestinian maneuvers at the UN.

However, Obama lacks the domestic backing to effectively pressure Israel, which has recently gained in bi-partisan support on Capitol Hill and among constituents, while Obama lost the “Bin Laden Bounce” and is struggling with a less-than-50% approval rating.

Obama’s power constraints are derivatives of the Federalist system, which is based on limited government with a complete separation of powers and checks and balances between Congress and the White House, Congressional “Power of the Purse” and the centrality of the constituent in a political system of bi-annual elections. Therefore, legislators are more loyal to – and fearful of – their constituents than to their party or to the president.  Moreover, the loyalty to constituents constitutes a prerequisite for re-election.

Obama’s constraints in pressuring the Jewish State emanate from the unique attitude of Americans – as early as the 1620 landing of the Mayflower, as well as the Founding Fathers – to the idea of reconstructing the Jewish Commonwealth in the Land of Israel.  The solid and sustained support enjoyed by Israel in the USA derives its vitality from the American people and from their representatives on Capitol Hill and in the legislatures of the 50 states more than from the president.  While the president plays a major role in shaping US-Israel relations, constituents and legislators laid the foundations for this relationship and they continuously codetermine its direction, tone and substance.  They can also initiate, suspend, terminate and amend policies, direct presidents and overhaul presidential policies.

The results of the November 2010 Congressional elections revealed that Obama’s policies had lost the support of most constituents.

According to a May 26, 2011 poll by CNN – which is usually critical of Israel – most Americans do not share Obama’s attitude towards Israel.  82% consider Israel an ally and a friend, compared with 72% in 2001.  67% support Israel, while only 16% support the Palestinians, compared with 60%:17% in 2009.  In fact, the Palestinians (16%) are as unpopular as are Iran (15%) and North Korea (17%).

These CNN findings exceed the February, 2011 Gallup poll (68% considered Israel an ally), the April 2011 Rasmussen Report (most Americans opposed foreign aid to Arab countries but supported foreign aid to Israel) and the April 2010 Quinnipiac Polling Institute (66% expected Obama to improve treatment of Israel).

But, the “Poll of Polls” is conducted daily in Congress – a coequal branch of government – where hard-core support of the Jewish State has been bi-partisan, robust and steady.  Majority Leader Senator Harry Reid and Minority Whip Congressman Steny Hoyer publicly criticized (fellow-Democrat) President Obama’s focus on the 1967 ceasefire lines. Other key Democrats – whose cooperation is critical to Obama’s reelection campaign – have clarified that they expect him to veto any anti-Israel UN resolution.  Just like their constituents – most Democrats value Israel as a unique ally, whose alliance with the US is based on shared values, mutual threats and joint interests.

Will Prime Minister Netanyahu leverage this unique American support, defying pressure and solidifying Israel’s posture of deterrence in the face of an unpredictably violent Middle East, where concessions breed radicalism, terrorism and war?  Or, will he succumb to the psychological warfare launched by the White House?

<em>Yoram Ettinger is former Israeli Ambassador to the United State and author of the Ettinger Report.</em>

Annual “Pull for the Kids” Truck & Tractor Pull scheduled for June 25 at the Greene County Fairgrounds

(XENIA, OH)  The Greene County Combined Health District (GCCHD) is holding its annual “Pull for the Kids” Truck and Tractor Pull on Saturday, June 25th at the Greene County Fairgrounds.  This event is a fundraiser for the Greene Community Health Foundation.  The philanthropic arm of GCCHD, the Greene Community Health Foundation raises and manages gifts on behalf of the Health District.  The generosity of our donors allows GCCHD to continue the commitment to offer quality healthcare to Greene County residents in need regardless of their ability to pay.

An antique tractor pull will begin at 10 a.m., a kiddie tractor pull at 3 p.m., and the big modified tractors and trucks begin at 5 p.m.  For those interested in entering a truck or tractor, entry fees range from $1 to $20, depending on the entry.  Cash prizes will be awarded for the winners in each division.  General admission is only $5.00 per adult and children ages 10 and younger are free.  Lots of family fun, food and drinks are on tap for all ages.

This event is sponsored in part by the Old Timers Club, Greene County FFA Alumni, Barker’s Towing, Greene County Dailies, Farm Bureau of Greene County and NAPA Auto Parts.  For more information, please contact Carol Sue Knox, Development Assistant at 937-374-5658 or by email at cknox@gcchd.org.

Greene County Combined Health District – Your center for public health services and health information in Greene County for over 90 years.