This is not Koch’s first such reversal. During the 2008 Democratic Party primary season, Koch had worried that a Barack Obama would not be a friend to Israel:

Hillary recently attempted to warn Iran that were it to launch nuclear weapons against Israel, the U.S. “would be able to totally obliterate them.” Hillary’s comments were totally in keeping with the doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction which kept the Soviet Union at bay during the Cold War when it threatened its European neighbors and members of NATO.

Instead of joining Hillary in a similar warning to Iran, Senator Obama on “Meet The Press” criticized Hillary stating, “It’s language reflective of George Bush…This kind of language is not helpful.”

Koch concluded:

We now know just how far Senator Obama is prepared to go to defend our friends and allies. It is not far enough.

Just four months later, without any change in Obama’s positions, Koch endorsed Barack Obama.

Then he went off to heavily Jewish states to convince American Jews that Israel should not be an issue in the campaign because Obama and McCain were equal in their support of Israel.

Once Obama was elected and proved to be horrible for America and Israel, Ed Koch became a leading critic of the POTUS and his anti-Israel policies. In March 2010 he wrote a commentary for the progressive Huffington Post called “Never Again Should We Be Silent“:

Now, in my opinion, based on the actions and statements by President Obama and members of his administration, there is grave doubt among supporters of Israel that President Obama can be counted on to do what presidents before him did – protect our ally, Israel. The Arabs can lose countless wars and still come back because of their numbers. If Israel were to lose one, it would cease to exist.

In April 2010 Koch doubled down, telling Neil Cavuto on Fox News;

“I have been a supporter of President Obama and went to Florida for him, urged Jews all over the country to vote for him saying that he would be just as good as John McCain on the security of Israel. I don’t think it’s true anymore,” Koch told Fox News’ Neil Cavuto.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu got a chilly reception at the White House last week after Israel announced plans to build 1,600 new apartments for Jews in East Jerusalem during a visit from Vice President Biden. The announcement drew sharp condemnations from Washington and calls to cancel the construction plans – requests that Netanyahu says he will not heed.

Koch said he believes Obama “orchestrated” what happened in Israel.

“What they did is they wanted to make Israel into a pariah,” he said. “It’s outrageous in my judgment. “

Koch said he’s shocked that Congress, which largely supports Israel hasn’t “stood up and said to the president, ‘you’re wrong on this, Mr. President.’”

Koch went on to say the self-serving Chuck Schumer had explained to him he wouldn’t speak out against Obama’s Israel positions publicly because he was working behind the scenes to get Obama to change is policy (it didn’t work). The former mayor continued by saying Schumer promised to speak out against Obama publicly should he not change his policies (Schumer hasn’t). He concluded by saying:

“I believe that the Obama administration is willing to throw Israel under the bus in order to please Muslim nations.”

Just this past September, Koch was a big part of the GOP victory in the special election to replace Anthony Weiner in NY-9. Koch’s reason for supporting the Republican Bob Turner was to send a message to President Obama.

If Jewish New Yorkers and others who support Israel were to turn away from the Democratic Party in that congressional election and elect the Republican candidate to Congress in 2011, it might very well cause President Obama to change his hostile position on the State of Israel and to reestablish the special relationship presidents before him had supported. His own reelection will be decided next year in 2012. The outcome of the 2011 congressional special election in the 9th Congressional District will certainly get his attention.

The former Mayor made this political threat to the occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave:

But if he doesn’t read the tea leaves and change his position, you can be certain I will continue to bang my drum. I will campaign against him not only in New York, but in other parts of the country next year. I’ll be loud and clear about what I believe. There are many Floridians who are concerned about the Obama administration’s treatment of Israel, and Florida will be crucial to the President’s reelection.

This week however, the once strong-minded Mayor made the same flip-flop he made in 2008 as he hosted an Obama fundraising event which raised a half a million dollars from 100 members of the Jewish community.

Koch’s change of heart comes the same week as the release of multiple reports of the Obama administration warning Israel not to defend herself against Iran.

President Barack Obama, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and other top officials have delivered a string of private messages to Israeli leaders warning about the dire consequences of a strike. The U.S. wants Israel to give more time for the effects of sanctions and other measures intended to force Iran to abandon its perceived efforts to build nuclear weapons.

Even though I disagreed with many of his positions, Ed Koch was one of my political heroes. He seemed to be a different kind of politician–one who put convictions in front of party affiliation.

I should have known better.  Ed Koch is comfortable bashing Obama until he sees the election coming–and suddenly any backbone is replaced by a wet noodle.

No voter should ever pick a President solely based on his position about Israel. I could understand if the former Mayor said that other issues were  much more important than Israel in the coming election. That is not what happened.

In 2008 he reversed himself lying about Obama to Jewish voters; saying the future President was McCain’s equal on the issues of terrorism and Israel. Now he is trying to do it again, first promising “But if he doesn’t read the tea leaves and change his position, you can be certain I will continue to bang my drum,” then breaking his promise.

Despite the fact that Obama has not budged in his anti-Israel positions, Ed Koch is trying to fool us once again and convince Jews that Obama is a Zionist.

When Koch was mayor he used to walk around the NYC saying “How am I doing?” The answer today is…. lousy!

Christmas is right around the corner and Hanukkah is even closer.  If you are like me, you will want to go shopping for presents that say “thank you” to some of our favorite political figures and news people who worked so hard during the past year to make our lives more—interesting.  I thought I would help you folks out and come up with a list of suggested items to get for some of my favorites.  I have given my list much thought but, sadly, I can’t afford to buy anything because of the lousy economy.  Yet, that doesn’t mean you guys can’t:

• Nancy Pelosi - An electric broom (what else do you get a witch who has everything?)

• Eric Holder - Hooked on Phonics. You ever see him at a committee hearing? All he ever says is, “no I didn’t read that.” It’s obvious that the guy can’t read.

• Mitt Romney – Not a waffle iron or a pair of flip-flops; that would be too easy. Like the Scarecrow in the Wizard of Oz, I want to get him a brain, not because he isn’t smart, but so he can understand why people are looking to nominate anybody but him.  I don’t think he gets it.

• Political Adviser David Axelrod - You know, I can’t think of anything he likes.  You will have to figure it out yourself.

• Former Vice President Al Gore - A heating pad… so he can honestly say it’s getting warmer… somewhere.

• Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann - A tape recorder that will keep asking her questions so she doesn’t have to interrupt at debates begging to answer every question offered up to other candidates.

• Abe Foxman (head of the ADL) -  A Jewish Star weighing 20 pounds to wear around his neck so he can be constantly reminded that he works for a Jewish organization, not a progressive think tank.

• Former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum - A pacifier so he can stop whining at debates.

• Former Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty - A time machine so he can go back in time and un-drop out of the race.  If he hung around, Pawlenty might have been the “not-Romney” candidate.

• The SCHMOTUS Joe Biden - A case of duct tape so he can cover his mouth every time he leaves his house.

• Alec Baldwin – Decaffeinated coffee.  There’s a guy who needs to calm down.

• Newt Gingrich - A copy of Arguing with Idiots, because he better study it before he ever appears on the “Glenn Beck Show” again.

• Jennifer Rubin of the Washington Post - A night with Mitt Romney (you know she wants it).

• Chris Matthews - A night with President Obama (you know he wants it).

• New York Senator Chuck Schumer - A night with Chuck Schumer (you know he wants it).  Plus a TV Camera and a cameraman to aim the camera at the Senator.  After all, it is all about him.

• Karl Rove – A life-sized cut out of President Obama.  The way I see it, Bush lost the popular vote in 2000 and he should have beaten John Kerry by much more than he did in 2004, so the only miracle election Rove ever pulled off was helping to give us Barack Obama in 2008.  He should have something to memorialize his big win.

• Jon Huntsman - A T-shirt saying “I’m Still Here.”

• Todd Palin - An opportunity to beat the crap out of everyone (with no repercussions) who has been lying about his family, starting with Levi Johnson.

• Donald Trump – A pair of big red floppy clown shoes and a big red rubber nose.  If he is going to act like a clown by interfering with the primary season just to get himself more publicity, he might as well look like one also.

• President Barack Obama – A brand new set of the best golf clubs available.  That way he will have something to do when he goes into retirement in January 2013. Also a map of the Holy Land created by his good friend, PA President Abbas. (Anybody notice something missing? The president didn’t.)

If I left you off this year’s list, I am very sorry, but money has been tight since January of 2009, and based on the coming of Obamacare and other programs the progressives are trying to stuff down our throats…well…things are going to get much tighter.

Senior administration officials met with Senate Democrats for an hour and a half on Thursday to answer their complaints about President Obama’s jobs bill.

Democratic lawmakers voiced objections to several of the president’s proposals to pay for the $447 billion stimulus package, including an elimination of tax breaks for the oil-and-gas industry.

David Plouffe, a senior adviser to the president, acknowledged after a marathon meeting in the Senate’s Mansfield Room that not all Democrats are sold on the plan.

Plouffe said officials hope to “convince the American people this is the right way to go to create jobs [and] convince as many Democrats here as we can.”

“I think the vast majority of them are excited about it,” Plouffe said after the meeting.

Sen. Mark Begich (D-Alaska) pointedly told Plouffe and National Economic Council Director Gene Sperling, who also attended the meeting, that the administration is wrong to target the revenues of oil-and-gas companies.

“I want a broader sweep on tax reform. Just picking out one industry is not acceptable,” Begich said after the meeting.

Read the whole thing here. At some point, even Democrats have to acknowledge that granting temporary tax relief in exchange for permanent tax hikes isn’t exactly an economic ’stimulus.’

This result is a rebuke to Barack Obama, but it is a rebuke as well—a stinging one, perhaps more stinging—to Senator Charles Schumer. He represented much of this district for 18 years. The now-disgraced Anthony Weiner was his staffer and pretty obviously Schumer’s chosen successor as congressman when he ran successfully for the Senate in 1998. In addition, Schumer has made it his special project to win back white middle class voters in places like metro New York for the Democratic Party.

In January 2007, just in time for the new Democratic majority in Congress, he published a book, Positively American: Winning Back the Middle-Class Majority One Family at a Time. It is a thoughtful essay on how Democrats can win the votes of the kind of voter Schumer himself has won over in his career as a congressman and senator, with specific policy recommendations as well as public relations advice. As one of the three Democratic leaders of the Democratic majority in the Senate—and by common reckoning the one who outshines in intellect the other two put together—Schumer has played an important role in fashioning Democratic policies, including but not limited to the 2009 stimulus package and Obamacare.

This vote is a startling repudiation of those policies by just the voters Schumer was hoping to win over.

I write this without any rancor for Chuck Schumer. I admire his intellect, I admire his capacity for hard work and while I think he often acts to gain partisan advantage I think it must also be said that he tries to achieve good public policy results. He has risen from a modest background (he is a graduate of James Madison High School in Brooklyn, the alma mater also of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and former Senator Norm Coleman: a pretty impressive record for a non-selective high school serving a non-affluent neighborhood) and has not gotten where he is because of personal wealth (he has none) or overpowering personal charm.

Schumer will surely continue to serve as senator as long as he wants (since direct election of senators came in, no incumbent Democratic senator from New York has been defeated for reelection). But his project of forging a Democratic governing majority based on successful public policies took a severe beating in this special election.

Read the whole thing here.

There is nothing conservative about Patent Reform and Leahy knows it. Too bad Smith doesn’t. In fact, Smith is pushing the House to vote on Leahy’s bill this week.

The legislation is a direct affront to American constitutional values and precedents, violates the Constitution and contains massive giveaways to big banks and the other Wall Street finance companies – each of them TARP recipients.

The House Leadership – flush with corporate cash – appears willing to turn their back on Tea Party principles in order to reward their K-Street benefactors.  The legislation has some stalwart conservative opponents but some Republican Study Committee members appear to be sitting on their hands – or worse.

HR 1239 Turns American Patent Law into European Patent Law

American patent law has created an economic environment that fosters innovation and creativity because it protects inventors; not lawyers.  Patents for nearly 200 years have been issued to the “First to Invent.”  In Europe, patents are issued to the “First to File.”  The proponents of the legislation admit their intent is to “harmonize” American patent law with their European counterparts.  This is no different than efforts to “harmonize” the American health care system with the nationalized health care system of Europe.  Do American inventors benefit from this change?  Absolutely not.  The benefactors are international and multi-national corporations with armies of lawyers – the members of PHRMA and the Chamber of Commerce.  Turning 200 years of American patent law on its head is not a conservative principle.

HR 1239 Contains Giveaways to Big Banks and TARP Recipients – Section 18 was inserted into the legislation to help big banks and Wall Street firms and it does so by violating two core constitutional principles.  The provision authored by Sen. Chuck Schumer and profiled in the New York Times under the title of “Schumer Helps Banks with a Patent Problem,” voids patents that were issued years ago and litigated.  But under the provision, if you are a bank, Wall Street firm or financial services company, you get another bite at the apple.  It’s clear that the provision is a violation of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution as it takes property without just compensation.  In addition, a conservative constitutional scholar notes the provision is a violation of the separation of powers:

Section 18 of H.R. 1249, operating in conjunction with Section 5 of the bill, authorizes parties who have been sued for infringement of, or accused of infringing, certain types of defined business method patents to seek the invalidation of those patents by the PTO in special “post-grant review” reexamination proceedings.  Critically, even patents whose validity has been sustained in final judicial decisions can be reexamined by the PTO under Section 18. By allowing an accused infringer who has unsuccessfully challenged the validity of a covered patent in federal court to seek reexamination of that same patent, Section 18 contravenes fundamental principles of separation powers as well as the related principle that federal courts are not empowered to issue “advisory opinions.”

Rep. Aaron Schrock (R-IL) has drafted an amendment to strip this provision from the legislation when the bill comes to the floor.  Word on the Hill is freshman Rep. Ben Quayle will do the banks bidding to fight for the Schumer provision.  Who is one of Quayle’s big donors? TARP recipient Bank of America.

There is nothing conservative about Patent Reform and Section 18 adds insult to injury – giving special interests special privileges.  Conservatives should oppose this attack on the American patent system and stand with the Constitution of the United States.

That’s because lobbyist for big banks and financial services companies are pressing the Leadership to fast track Patent Reform legislation. Tucked inside the bill is an insidious provision that undermines the very reason we have a patent system at all.

Section 18, authored by Sen. Chuck Schumer, would allow big banks – the recipients of billions in bailout money – to retroactively attack patents held by small businesses and inventors. It’s another bankster giveaway that must be yanked from the bill before it is considered for action.

But just as critically, the legislation moves the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) out of the world of discretionary spending and into the world of mandatory government spending. Budget Committee Chairman Ryan and his counterpart on the Appropriations Committee, Hal Rogers, are strongly fighting the move.

In a letter to the House Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith – a champion of the legislation – Ryan and Rogers are calling the legislation fiscally irresponsible.

“We Strongly oppose this proposed shift of billions in discretionary funding and fee collections to mandatory spending. Putting PTO funding on auto-pilot is a move in exactly the wrong direction, given the new Republican majority’s commitment to restraining spending, improving accountability and transparency, and reducing the nation’s unparalleled deficits and debt.

“Placing PTO spending on mandatory auto-pilot as outlined in H.R. 1249 would also hand the Congressional ‘power of the purse’ – bestowed in the Constitution – to the Obama White House and essentially eliminate the ability of Congress to perform substantive oversight of the PTO. We strongly oppose undermining these critical efforts, particularly when House Republicans have pledged to strengthen oversight of federal agencies to ensure resources are being used wisely and appropriately, and to prevent federal agencies from over-stepping their authority.”

Ryan and Rogers make it clear, moving Patent Reform as written would undermine Republican’s commitment to fiscal responsibility and should be delayed.

Republicans are skating on thin ice. Whether they move patent reform legislation is a test for their resolve both to fiscal responsibility and whether they can say no to big money lobbyists.

Apparently not. The big banks are still hungry and Congress is poised to feed them again.

The Senate has passed patent reform legislation that the House is prepared to vote on sometime this month. The bill contains a provision, authored by Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) that would empower the bankers to blatantly steal patents without just compensation to the patent holders.

Inventors get shafted and the bankers make off like bandits – again.

The American patent system was designed to protect small inventors. It has been a cornerstone of American prosperity since the founding of the Republic. Changing the system is controversial and a significant portion of the conservative movement opposes the legislation outright. But they are swimming upstream.

The Senate has passed the bill by a huge margin and the bill passed the Republican House Judiciary Committee as well. The word on the Hill is that the Leadership is preparing to schedule the bill sometime next week.

Not so fast.

Handing big banks the ability to steal patents from investors is among the most egregious examples of big business using government to pad their bottom line and tantamount to another bailout – all to placate the Financial Services Roundtable and the American Bankers Association.

Members of the conservative House Republican Study Committee need to flex their muscles – fast. There is no reason for another government handout to big banks. House Majority Leader Eric Cantor can demand the provision be removed before he brings the bill to the House floor. The question is: will he stand for principle or will he stand with Sen. Schumer and the banking lobbyists?