Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12
  1. #1 Damage control on the Middle East speech 
    An Adversary of Linda #'s
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    22,891
    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
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    An Adversary of Linda #'s
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    22,891
    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
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    An Adversary of Linda #'s
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    22,891
    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/...9C9G_blog.html
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    Administrator SaintLouieWoman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Sarasota Florida
    Posts
    40,334
    And the Judas goats will only have themselves to blame. You'd think that they would have learned the really harsh lessons of history.
    http://http://i145.photobucket.com/albums/r231/SarasotaRepub/83069bcc.png

    " To the world you are just one more person, but to a rescued pet, you are the world."

    "
    A Nation of Sheep Breeds a Government of Wolves!"


    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    Fabulous Poster
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    10,161
    Quote Originally Posted by SaintLouieWoman View Post
    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.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #6  
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    11,970
    Quote Originally Posted by Novaheart View Post
    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".
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #7  
    An Adversary of Linda #'s
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    22,891
    Quote Originally Posted by lacarnut View Post
    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 ..
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #8  
    Fabulous Poster
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    10,161
    Quote Originally Posted by lacarnut View Post
    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?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #9  
    Fabulous Poster
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    10,161
    Quote Originally Posted by megimoo View Post
    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.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #10  
    An Adversary of Linda #'s
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    22,891
    Quote Originally Posted by Novaheart View Post
    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 .
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •