Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni’s attempt to form a new coalition government in Israel has failed. According to several reports, discussions collapsed largely because of Kadima’s plan to share control of Jerusalem with the Palestinians.

“They want to halt the diplomatic negotiations,” Livni said last night. “I won’t accept that. I have a responsibility towards this country.” Therefore, general elections will most likely be set for mid-February. “It will be a high-stakes election,” the New York Times wrote yesterday,

in which Ms. Livni is expected to face two candidates who have already been prime minister: Mr. Barak, of Labor, and Benjamin Netanyahu of the opposition Likud, the current front-runner in election surveys.Ms. Livni is expected to run with the message that she has been leading negotiations with the Palestinians and should finish the job. Mr. Netanyahu has told associates that he hopes ultimately to form a national unity government to face the country’s challenges. He is more hawkish than the other two.

Israel’s political turmoil effectively ends all remaining hope for the Palestinian-Israel peace deal President Bush wanted in place before he leaves office.

“Palestinians expressed worry Sunday that Livni’s decision could put already fragile peace talks in limbo for months until the elections are held,” the Jerusalem Post wrote today.

An aide to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas warned that the Israeli political turmoil could threaten peacemaking.

For three years now, we have been preparing our readers for the likely rightward tilt in Israeli politics—at least with respect to securing its borders. As my father stated in March 2006,

[B]ased on the conflict Zechariah describes between the Palestinians and the Israeli government … Benjamin Netanyahu’s conservative Likud party could bounce back and win the Israeli elections ….”

While that didn’t happen in March 2006, today Netanyahu is the front-runner. However the details play out, prophecy is sure. The violent division of Jerusalem as prophesied by Zechariah doesn’t depend on a conservative government being elected in Israel. But if Benjamin Netanyahu does return to power, as my father suggested in early 2006, we could see the Zechariah 14 crisis come to a head much more quickly.

America Supplies Military Aid to … Hezbollah?

The United States has recommitted to building Lebanon’s military, according to an International Herald Tribune report. The organization’s ineffectiveness, and its need for greater strength, is beyond dispute. But the problems in Lebanon go so far beyond its ill-equipped armed forces that this move will likely do more harm than good.

As we pointed out in our August 2008 edition, Iran effectively conquered Lebanon through its proxy Hezbollah this past summer. This Iranian-sponsored terrorist group has veto power in the new government. The U.S. did nothing to prevent the action, and actually legitimized it by smiling on a subsequent political agreement that consolidated Hezbollah’s new position. Here is the Tribune’s explanation for what this new military aid will supposedly achieve:

The new wave of aid, the first major American military assistance to Lebanon since the 1980s, is meant to build an armed force that could help stabilize Lebanon’s perpetually fractured state, fight a rising terrorist threat and provide a legitimate alternative to the Shiite militant group Hezbollah.

By “legitimate alternative,” the article is apparently talking about Hezbollah’s claim to be the only force strong enough to defend Lebanon against Israel. In truth, it is primarily Hezbollah that creates friction between Lebanon and Israel in the first place, and a Hezbollah-free Lebanon would hardly need defending against Israel. But again, the idea that Hezbollah can be somehow neutralized simply by supplying the Lebanese military—rather than by confronting it directly—is patently wrong.

What this military aid will most likely end up doing is precisely the opposite of what it is intended to do. Given Hezbollah’s strong and growing power within Lebanon, the equipment the U.S. is giving to the Lebanese military is almost certain to find its way into Hezbollah’s hands. The Tribune makes mention of this possibility:

Some officials within the Pentagon and State Department have expressed concern about extensive military aid to a country so recently free of Syrian control and in which Hezbollah, which has close Syrian and Iranian ties, has continued to gain political power. And that has been a main concern for Israel, which has been lobbying for a lower level of support to remove the possibility that American tanks and helicopters might one day be used against it.

Keep your eye on this equipment. For a recent historical example, look at how aid the U.S. gave to the Palestinian Authority made its way into Hamas hands.

Evidence of America’s shrinking effectiveness as a world power continues to mount.

Fanning the Flames of Hate—Part 2

Earlier this month, we posted a column about how media elites are framing the U.S. election in a way such that if Barack Obama loses, the only possible reason could be racial prejudice. A few days after we wrote that, the New York Timesreported that “while Mr. Obama’s advisers say they do not think race will be a factor in the election, the actual extent of the racial divide is likely to become clear only on Nov. 4” (emphasis ours throughout).

In other words, unless Obama wins, the problem with racism is bad—really bad.

Even in its fawning endorsement of Barack Obama on Friday, the New York Times editorial board just couldn’t resist hurling an inflammatory accusation at John McCain, saying he “has retreated farther and farther to the fringe of American politics, running a campaign on partisan division, class warfare and even hints of racism.”

Note that—it’s not just John McCain’s supporters on the far right who harbor racially motivated voting tendencies. It’s now John McCain who’s fomenting racial prejudice.

Yesterday, Rep. John Lewis, a Georgia Democrat and veteran civil rights activist, accused John McCain and Sarah Palin of “sowing the seeds of hatred and division.” Lewis has compared McCain to George Wallace, a segregationist governor of Alabama who fueled racially driven violence during the 1960s.

Meanwhile, John McCain—even against the wishes of many advisers and conservative commentators—steadfastly refuses to raise the dubious 20-year relationship between Barack Obama and his racist pastor.

As noted in a piece that ran in the Chicago Sun-Times today, it is the Obama camp—not John McCain—that is stealthily playing the race card this campaign season:

Obama’s string of victories in early Democratic primaries against far better known white candidates shows that large segments of the American population have moved beyond race.Obama and his supporters have hyped race, after his large lead in the polls began to shrink or evaporate, as more of the facts about his checkered career came out. Almost any criticism of Obama has been equated with racism, even if there is no connection that can be seen under a microscope.Obama started this trend when he warned that his opponents were going to try to scare the public with various charges, including a statement, “And did I say he was black?”John McCain said no such thing.Palin said no such thing. But those who support Obama—and this includes much of the media—are acting as if they just know that this is the underlying message.Rep. John Lewis has likened McCain to George Wallace. Rep. John Murtha has condemned a whole section of the state of Pennsylvania as “racists” because they seem reluctant to jump on the Obama bandwagon.Sen. Harry Reid has claimed that linking Obama to deposed and disgraced Fannie Mae ceo Franklin Raines is racist, because they are both black—as if the financial and political connection between the two does not exist.Much is being made of the fact that, in past elections, some white voters told pollsters they were voting for a black candidate but did not in fact do so, so that a black candidate leading in the polls ended up losing.This is supposed to show how much covert racism there is. It might instead show that people don’t want to be considered racists by pollsters because they are leaning toward someone other than the black candidate.In other words, the media have helped create the charged atmosphere in which some people give misleading answers to pollsters to avoid being stigmatized.

As we have noted before, the major media is largely responsible for setting off this ticking time bomb.

If Obama maintains his lead and wins on November 4, his radical leftist ideology will accelerate America’s already precipitous decline as a world power.

And if he loses, it could trigger race wars.

In Over His Head—Part 2

America’s next president will inherit the most troubled nation of any U.S. leader since Franklin D. Roosevelt, the International Herald Tribunewrote today. The worrying part, the article notes, is that neither candidate has really informed voters about the challenges ahead:

Obama, when asked what policy changes this new environment requires or what sacrifices are necessary, talks vaguely about the need to “start thinking” about energy conservation and the like. He refuses to cite any significant spending cuts he would make in light of the new fiscal situation.He suggests that the country can have universal health-care coverage, make a huge down payment on energy independence and fund expensive alternative-energy sources, enact a variety of desirable new domestic initiatives and cut taxes for 80 percent of Americans. All in his first term.

John McCain offers similarly vague pledges in promising a better tomorrow. Regarding his plan to balance the budget within four years, the iht writes,

There are only two ways to even start down the road to a balanced budget: Cut back on the growth in entitlements, like Social Security and Medicare, and scale back the $4.2 trillion in tax cuts over 10 years that the Arizona Republican has promised. On these, McCain is silent.

As we noted in one of our own columns recently,

The presidential candidates, though they may differ with some of these specifics, nevertheless accept the general premise that the nation’s problems are worse than ever. In response, they each say, That makes it all the more important that you vote for me. It’s because of all those troubles that this is, in fact, the most important election of our lifetime. I’m the only man who can change things!But there is a darker reality that both candidates and their supporters, caught up in the commotion of the campaign, are ignoring.

Read the entire column here.

Another Massive Economic Meltdown—See Section C, Page 47

Amid the collapse of the U.S. banking industry, a number of other front-page stories relating to the economy have received only sparse coverage, the International Herald Tribunesays. The potential bankruptcies of General Motors, the world’s largest automaker, and Chrysler have been relegated to startling developments lost “in a season chock full of startling news,” the Tribune writes.

Yet it is an epic moment. Autos have been prized jewels in America’s industrial crown for the better part of a century, and Detroit once dominated a truly global industry. Now, possible bankruptcy looms for gm and perhaps Chrysler.

American automakers have been pounded by the rise in fuel costs over the last year. During the ’80s and ’90s, it was the minivan and the suv that saved the Detroit giants. General Motors, for example, made about $10,000 to $15,000 profit on each suv sold. But much of that was spent on higher-than-average industry wages, pensions and, as it turns out, poor product development.

“Made in America” manufacturing takes another hit. For more, go here.

Elsewhere on the Web

The former U.S. Army head of operations in the Middle East, Ret. Gen. John Abizaid, said earlier this month he doubted whether Israel could make a “lasting impression on the Iranian nuclear program with their military capabilities.” He now believes Israel must live with a nuclear Iran. Thus, even as Israel’s next prime minister faces intense pressure from abroad to “live with” an Iranian bomb, the mullahs in Tehran will continue working feverishly to develop a weapon they hope will guarantee Israel’s annihilation.

Haaretz wrote last night, “Several American media outlets reported on Saturday that President George Bush is likely to announce after next month’s presidential elections that he intends to restore the diplomatic relations with Iran, almost 30 years after they were suspended.” The Trumpet has been tracking the evidence leading to such an event for some time. Certainly the U.S. doesn’t have the will to confront the world’s number-one state sponsor of terror.

Israel’s Military Intelligence Chief Amos Yadlin told the Israeli cabinet today that Syrian President Bashar Assad “is continuing to throw open the doors of Syria’s warehouses for Hezbollah, and has become ‘Hezbollah’s arsenal.’ Assad trusts Hezbollah more than his own army and Hezbollah operatives act in Syria as if it’s their own [country],” Yadlin said.

Pope Benedict xvi continues his drive to bring back the “daughter” churches of the Catholic Church. The spiritual leader of the world’s Orthodox Christians, Patriarch Bartholomew i, recently prayed with Pope Benedict in the Sistine Chapel in Vatican City. The two men are eager to bridge a nearly millennium-long schism between the two churches. “The split between Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches,” this article notes, “centers on the primacy of the pope.”

The Australian reports, “Alan Greenspan has finally conceded that the free market philosophy he championed for 40 years has fundamental flaws.” The Federal Reserve chairman from 1987 to 2006 said there was something deeply wrong in the “critical functioning structure that defines how the world works.” Yes, “the end of American capitalism” has arrived. Read this for an explanation of one of the fundamental reasons.

Victor Davis Hanson pins the blame for the financial crisis on our culture of debt. “The blame game goes on and on. But so far no one seems willing to tell the American people the truth: It is not just ‘they,’ but we, the people, who have recklessly borrowed to spend what we haven’t yet earned.”

And Finally …

If you thought the poll numbers in the U.S. looked bad for John McCain, check out the Economist’s “Global Electoral College”—a read on what would happen if the whole world could vote using America’s electoral college system. There the Obama-Biden ticket currently leads McCain-Palin by 9,103 electoral votes to 171. You can be sure all these foreign nations wouldn’t be voting for a stronger America. At the same time, this figure also gives you an idea of what would happen to America’s reputation abroad should McCain-Palin manage to win.