Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 10/12/2025 10:07:14 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
Perhaps one of Donald Trump’s greatest strengths has always been the fact he simply doesn’t care what others think. Well, at least about most things. Doubtless today he will be feeling a little bruised after being overlooked for his much-longed-for Nobel Prize.
Otherwise, his often cavalier policy decisions and unflinching pursuit of the deal are largely immune to political opinion. Guided instead by visceral instinct and astonishing self-belief, it’s an approach predicated on the conviction that if the president roars loudly enough, the school bully will back down.
It’s precisely this approach that has led some Jewish people in Britain, myself included, to view Trump – at least in relation to Israel – as what our ancient tradition terms a shaliach mitzvah: a traveller appointed as an emissary to carry out a good deed.
Thanks to Trump’s determination to achieve a ceasefire in Gaza, the tantalising prospect of the remaining hostages being released on Monday and the war finally ending feels enticingly within reach.
Much to celebrate. But this welcome turn of events also highlights in both attitude and methodology how Trump stands in stark contrast to Keir Starmer. A Prime Minister whose idea of showing strength lies in feeble posturing and endorsing the fallacious demonisation of Israel, regardless of the potential consequences for Jews in this country.
Starmer’s reaction to the Gaza crisis has amounted to little more than empty rhetoric: a series of diplomatically irrelevant, self-serving declarations that have done as much to end the war as trying to start a fire with a damp match.
Most grievously, perhaps, witnessed in his recent no-strings-attached recognition of a Palestinian state. Which, since it wasn’t contingent on the release of hostages or the disarming of Hamas, could be regarded as a reward for terrorism. It was a move...
(Excerpt) Read more at yahoo.com ...
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
Starmer is responsible for the muslim takeover of the UK.
Time for heads to roll.
King Charles? What a waste. William? Not soon enough.
Yahoo has no understanding of Trump of course. Trump knew the TDS children at nobel could not bring themselves to give him the award. He was not “bruised”.
“...his much longed for peace prize..”
Oh, really? Proof?
It wouldn’t be a msm article without at least one lie or fantasy.
“We will no longer tolerate being taken for granted. We are a powerful, united force of 4 million acting in unison.”
In his sleep. Herr shtarmer is pretty much useless as a demorcrat sentaor or congresscritter.
In Britain it's a political party, more akin to what the Republican Party is here. Spouting all the right platitudes to get elected, then running things like a milder version of their totalitarian opponents.
I lot of Brits have come to realize you get the gov’t you vote for.
As is their practice: Amass numbers, then make demands and take over, violently if necessary.
“Starmer is responsible for the muslim takeover of the UK.”
And the Brits are responsible for Starmer - that’s who’s ultimately to blame.
IOW, they’re getting what they voted for.
First immigrants come for the unskilled jobs, followed by the politician jobs.
It takes less skill get votes than to work as a lawyer, as Joe Biden knew.
I think that there is value in comparing the USA to the UK.
America had its “Uniparty” in 2016 and Trump could have run as an outsider - and lost. He chose the more difficult path of leaving his lifelong Party to enter as a Republican and force his will onto that Party.
The UK had no such luck. Rather it demonstrated the “Ross Perot” effect of adding an outsider and insuring the victory of the least popular position. It deals with the result of this, today.
He’s very much a “minority” prime minister as far as actual voting numbers go. I think like 2/3’rd of UK voters voted for a party other than Labor. Labor had the happy circumstance of having such a divided electorate that their candidates won by plurality in enough districts to give them a huge parliamentary majority. In the UK the parliamentary majority no mater how slim a voter majority it sits on is still the majority and selects the PM.
“..
Labour won 34% of all votes cast in the UK (and under the UK’s ‘First Past the Post’ electoral system, 63% of all seats in the House of Commons). By the same token, 66% of voters voted for parties other than Labour and therefore “against Labour”.
...”
Let this be a lesson to all that wish we had some sort of parliamentary multiparty structure here. Canada and Australia are in similar messes for similar reasons.
They're the same.
“That’s what we have here, too. Whoever gets the most votes wins.
The differences are, we don’t have a competitive third party and the president is elected by the people rather than selected by the party that has a legislative majority. (this last one is huge)
Also it seems odd that in a “first past the post” system there would be more than two viable parties. In that system it makes sense for parties to form a coalition with like minded parties BEFORE the election and run as one. And that means you end up with two different coalitions running against each other like we have here with the liberals (D) and the conservatives(R).
I guess in Britain Reform split from the Tories which gave the election to labor?
Very very much aware of the differences between a parliamentary system and an executive (our) system. If we had a competitive 3rd party here after one or two election cycles it would be swallowed up by one of the two major parties. Our system is designed for two parties only. It doesn’t matter their names. Voting factions congregate around two issues. Strong central government weak state government or strong state government weak central government. It’s been that way since the revolution. Every issue when you strip it down is that!
Both of the once and future kings are left-wing woketards
Bkmk
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.