Although
the Obama administration does not seem to know where Jerusalem actually is, the mayor of Tel Aviv assures us that the City of David is the capital of the Jewish state.
By the way, didn't Obama claim in a 2008 speech to AIPAC that “Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel and it must remain undivided”? Yes, I believe he did. And, yet, somehow, Obama's Department of State does not concur.
This is because Obama lied to American Jewry in that 2008 speech. You can be sure that if Obama really thought that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel that his Department of State would have gotten that word, as well.
They didn't and the fact that they didn't gives me yet another reason not to trust this president.
It's just common sense. The guy lied to us. Period.
No question there is clear disparity. He gave that speech wearing the hat of Democratic candidate, wooing Jewish votes.
ReplyDeleteThe actions have not conformed to the words. This is not what one expects of a "best" friend, and it is silly and fanatical to suggest he occupies that role. Holding a seder does not cancel things out.
This does not even go to the repeated and continued snubbing of Israel in the international arena. Or the strange welcoming of a Morsi who boldly proclaims the same political message as al-Qaradawi, the US accepted mediator!
The tactical blunders are not of the quantum to seriously affect the strategic position of the US, although they do not benefit the latter by any means.
Yup. And it's not as if Obama has never done anything good for the Jewish state. It's just that, imo, the overarching effect of his presidency has been a net negative, not a net positive, for both Israel and the US.
DeleteFrom where I sit the ruination of whatever potential there might have been in the peace process coupled with Obama's welcoming posture toward radical Islam places him outside the bounds of what is acceptable in an American president.
Sure, he called for a minute of silence in the Olympics for the Munich dead, but what is that compared to my two major criticisms above?
It is as nothing.
When dealing with sycophants, though, any criticism whatsoever will draw extreme reactions. Especially criticism from the left. If you really want to see something nasty, tell one of these folks Obama hasn't fought hard enough for the working poor (which he hasn't).
DeleteSome of these folks would punch their own mother in the mouth before they'd ever even admit one fault of the current president...
Another question to ask is just what drives sycophancy?
DeleteI'm not a shrink, but I suspect that it has something to do with the need for feelings of security. Y'know, the good guy is in office, that is, the guy you voted for is in office, so therefore all should be OK if only we give him our support.
Something quite like that.
It represents an abandonment of one's critical faculties in favor of a warm and cozy feeling of security which derives from placing one's faith in the leader of the pack.
Yeah, could definitely be that too. And when all else fails, certain simpletons at other blogs can always claim that "African American features" are the only possible reason anyone can ever oppose the president on anything, ever. I mean, after all, how can anyone possibly ever even think one unkind thought about The Greatest American To Ever Draw A Breath?!!?!
DeleteDo they even have an inkling as to how fucking stupid they sound?
I mean, I know reasonable people can disagree, and in the end I've resigned myself to voting Democratic as always. It would sure be nice if we had a realistic alternative that actually stood and fought for social democratic values, however. And I certainly don't mean egotistical shitheads like Nader or antisemitic lunatics like the various US Green Parties and the Cynthia McKinney types they put forth...
But yeah, I think your prognosis does hit it right on the nose, actually. For all the grief certain 'progressives' give certain Republican factions, they're just as guilty of the "tuck us in and tell us it'll all be okay, daddy!" thing, themselves.