PDA

View Full Version : Damage control on the Middle East speech



megimoo
05-22-2011, 08:58 PM
Obama blew it yesterday.
The Israelis are infuriated, numerous sharp-eyed lawmakers spotted the forced concessions Obama was demanding of Israel and, if former AIPAC spokesman Josh Block is any indication, the most prominent pro-Israel Jewish group is very, very worried. So what does Obama do? He reverses course — fast!

On the BBC last night, Obama immediately nixed his definitive language on the 1967 borders and reverted to language that sounded more in tune with that of former presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush:

To the BBC, the president said, “The basis for negotiations will involve looking at that 1967 border, recognizing that conditions on the ground have changed and there are going to need to be swaps to accommodate the interests of both sides. That’s on the one hand and on the other hand, and this was an equally important part of the speech, Israel is going to have to feel confident about its security on the West Bank and that security element is going to be important to the Israelis.”

The president said that the Israelis “will not be able to move forward unless they feel that they themselves can defend their territory particularly given what they have seen happen in Gaza and the rockets that have been fired by Hezbollah.”

That is as sure a sign as any that the speech was an overstep, and a misstep, that the Israelis are infuriated and that Obama is now in a pinch.

What to make of all the liberal Jewish groups and pundits who fawned over the speech and insisted there was no change in U.S. policy contained in Obama’s statement on the 1967 borders (which is a misnomer; there is only the 1949 armistice line)?

They have, to the extent they had any credibility, discredited themselves as reliable translators to Jews and Americans at large of the peace process. Whether through ignorance or through an insatiable need to defend a liberal president at all costs, they leapt into the fray to deny that Obama said anything damaging at all.

The proof of Obama’s misstep is his swift backpedal, which, I suspect, will continue today.
\
http://www.israpundit.com/archives/36148

megimoo
05-22-2011, 09:06 PM
ADL and NJDC: Obama's Anti-Israel Garbage Doesn't Stink

Abraham Foxman, Democratic Party Judas Goat, puts Obama's Re-election Above ADL's MissionNational Jewish Democratic Council (National Judenrat Democratic Kapos) Join in Whitewash .
A Judas goat is a tame animal whose function is to lead other herd animals into a meat packing factory to be “processed.”

A Judas goat has no choice but ADL’s Abraham Foxman and the NJDC’s David A. Harris and Marc R. Stanley are in contrast shameless political prostitutes who place the well-being of the Democratic Party above that of the United States, its allies, and even the Jews they claim to represent. ....

http://www.israpundit.com/archives/36185

megimoo
05-22-2011, 09:15 PM
Obama double downs at AIPAC

The president just finished speaking to a packed convention room at the AIPAC policy conference. He was not booed when he entered; most stood and offered brief applause. Still, the crowd during the speech had long periods of stony silence, and audible boos were heard when he brought up his plan to base an Israeli-Palestinian peace deal on the 1967 border lines. President Obama took nothing back from his foreign policy speech on Thursday and blamed the press for any controversy. He doubled down, making this upcoming presidential election a time for choosing for friends of Israel.
snip
Obama must be very certain that liberal Jews will enthusiastically support him no matter what. And there is evidence he is right. Josh Block, senior fellow at the Progressive Policy Institute and a former AIPAC spokesman, e-mailed: “It [the speech] was a strong reaffirmation of the US-Israel relationship, and was an important and positive change from his remarks on Thursday. It reflected an important continuity of US policy going back to President Johnson.”

This is the sort of spin that pro-Israel Democrats use to justify voting for Obama. But there is a reality that can’t be avoided. This president once again has proved an apt negotiator on behalf of the Palestinians and a thorn in Israel’s side. Now is a time of choosing for the American Jewish community, for Israel and for Congress. And if Obama should be reelected in 2012 one can only imagine how hostile he will become toward the Jewish state.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/post/obama-double-downs-at-aipac/2011/03/29/AFhx9C9G_blog.html

SaintLouieWoman
05-22-2011, 11:31 PM
And the Judas goats will only have themselves to blame. You'd think that they would have learned the really harsh lessons of history.

Novaheart
05-23-2011, 12:46 AM
And the Judas goats will only have themselves to blame. You'd think that they would have learned the really harsh lessons of history.

2012 is going to be rough. However, unless a GOP candidate stands firm on the border security, deporting illegals, prosecuting employers (including executives) , prosecuting those (including churches) who harbor illegal aliens then there won't be much reason to consider a switch. One useless turd is as good as another.

lacarnut
05-23-2011, 01:49 AM
2012 is going to be rough. However, unless a GOP candidate stands firm on the border security, deporting illegals, prosecuting employers (including executives) , prosecuting those (including churches) who harbor illegal aliens then there won't be much reason to consider a switch. One useless turd is as good as another.

Bull crap. The top issues are the economy, unemployment, energy solutions and debt with immigration down the list. FYI, Obama is the biggest POS that ever graced the W.H.

Your statement is a pathetic attempt to distract Repubs off of bread and butter issues and that is "it's the economy stupid".

megimoo
05-23-2011, 08:16 AM
Bull crap. The top issues are the economy, unemployment, energy solutions and debt with immigration down the list. FYI, Obama is the biggest POS that ever graced the W.H.

Your statement is a pathetic attempt to distract Repubs off of bread and butter issues and that is "it's the economy stupid".
Nova's primary role at CU is the spin the Progressive/Maoist's crap ..

Novaheart
05-23-2011, 10:43 AM
Bull crap. The top issues are the economy, unemployment, energy solutions and debt with immigration down the list. FYI, Obama is the biggest POS that ever graced the W.H.

Your statement is a pathetic attempt to distract Repubs off of bread and butter issues and that is "it's the economy stupid".

Have you forgotten Abraham Lincoln?

Novaheart
05-23-2011, 10:44 AM
Nova's primary role at CU is the spin the Progressive/Maoist's crap ..

Yeah, because I support civil rights and nondiscrimination, and because I support getting universal comprehensive healthcare in exchange for what we already pay for it.

megimoo
05-23-2011, 11:18 AM
Yeah, because I support civil rights and nondiscrimination, and because I support getting universal comprehensive healthcare in exchange for what we already pay for it.
Civil rights for blacks is done and here.You attempt to 'piggyback' so called gay rights on black civil rights to support gay marrage and call it a right where none exists .
Government health care is socialized medicine and has been proven a total failure wherever it's been implemented .

lacarnut
05-23-2011, 02:50 PM
Have you forgotten Abraham Lincoln?

Your ideal candidate would be one that advocated single payer and gay marriage for homos. Got news for you. Gay marriage got voted down in CA because a greater percentage of blacks than whites opposed it. Trying to piggy back queerdom on to civil rights is a losing strategy.

Odysseus
05-23-2011, 07:03 PM
Obama must be very certain that liberal Jews will enthusiastically support him no matter what. And there is evidence he is right. Josh Block, senior fellow at the Progressive Policy Institute and a former AIPAC spokesman, e-mailed: “It [the speech] was a strong reaffirmation of the US-Israel relationship, and was an important and positive change from his remarks on Thursday. It reflected an important continuity of US policy going back to President Johnson.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/post/obama-double-downs-at-aipac/2011/03/29/AFhx9C9G_blog.html
In 1993, David Dinkins got a lot less of the Jewish vote than he did in 1989, especially after the Crown Heights pogrom. A buddy of mine referred to Jews who voted for Dinkins in '93 as the "cattlecar" vote, and it was a significantly reduced vote. It was a close election, with Rudy winning by just 30,000 votes out of several million cast, and since Dinkins didn't get enough to put him over the top, his supporters made some inflammatory statements that blamed Jews on the upper west side for defecting. Similarly, Carter's constant attacks on Israel and his UN ambassador's meetings with the PLO soured a lot of Jews on him, and pretty much created the NeoCon movement. Reagan got a higher percentage of Jewish voters than any Republican in years. Obama will get the votes of those Jews who put Party loyalty ahead of their identity as Jews, but even Stalin got some Jews to support his pact with Hitler (Bella Abzug was notorious for having given a speech in support of it). Obama's supporters have made some virulently anti-semitic comments, just as Andy Young and Al Sharpton did before them, and I predict that he will have lost most of the Jewish vote outside of the far left, just as Dinkins and Carter did.

2012 is going to be rough. However, unless a GOP candidate stands firm on the border security, deporting illegals, prosecuting employers (including executives) , prosecuting those (including churches) who harbor illegal aliens then there won't be much reason to consider a switch. One useless turd is as good as another.


Bull crap. The top issues are the economy, unemployment, energy solutions and debt with immigration down the list. FYI, Obama is the biggest POS that ever graced the W.H.

Your statement is a pathetic attempt to distract Repubs off of bread and butter issues and that is "it's the economy stupid".
Uh, hate to argue with you, but Nova has a point. Border security is an issue that affects the economy, unemployment and a host of other issues, especially National Security. It's one of the reasons that spending is so high on social programs in border states, and the constant influx of illegals suppresses job growth. A Republican who made the case to legal immigrants (especially Latinos) that illegal immigration hurts them most of all (by choking the pipeline that they hope to use to bring their families over legally) and that amnesty insults their compliance with the law will make serious inroads there, but we have to buy the airtime on Spanish-language media to do that.