Originally posted at 1:27 p.m.
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 reformation 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.” – Obama double downs at AIPAC, By Jennifer Rubin
You’ve got to hand it to them, as political theater goes this was good. Of course, Jennifer Rubin’s head has now exploded all over the Washington Post, but her sort of incoming is predictable.
Now, I’m no fan of Rep. Hoyer’s blue-doggedness, but after his red meat rhetoric Sunday at AIPAC, Pres. Obama came on to the stage like a political prize fighter. The one – two punch rhetorical tag team worked, because Hoyer got standing ovation after ovation and even got what sounded like more applause when he was mentioned by Obama than hawk weenie Eric Cantor did.
Steve Clemons tweeted something the other day that got my attention, but now comes with actual footage.
I get Barack “Rocky Balboa” Obama now He’s letting Netanyahu kick crap out of him round after round & wearing Bibi down. Obama stays in ring – Steve Clemons
Now, it was my reference to the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps that received the lion’s share of the attention. And since my position has been misrepresented several times, let me reaffirm what “1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps” means.
By definition, it means that the parties themselves – Israelis and Palestinians – will negotiate a border that is different than the one that existed on June 4, 1967. It is a well known formula to all who have worked on this issue for a generation. It allows the parties themselves to account for the changes that have taken place over the last forty-four years, including the new demographic realities on the ground and the needs of both sides. The ultimate goal is two states for two peoples. Israel as a Jewish state and the homeland for the Jewish people, and the state of Palestine as the homeland for the Palestinian people; each state enjoying self-determination, mutual recognition, and peace.
If there’s a controversy, then, it’s not based in substance. What I did on Thursday was to say publicly what has long been acknowledged privately. I have done so because we cannot afford to wait another decade, or another two decades, or another three decades, to achieve peace. The world is moving too fast. The extraordinary challenges facing Israel would only grow. Delay will undermine Israel’s security and the peace that the Israeli people deserve.
In case you didn’t catch it, that sentence in bold was directed at PM Netanyahu, who earned the diplomatic shout out after he conveniently chose to ignore and press Pres. Obama that something had changed when Obama uttered “1967,” because Netanyahu purposefully ignored with land swaps. Rubin characterized Obama calling out the naked political mischaracterization as “blame-the-media and woe-is-me sentiments that were shameful displays by a U.S. president”.
Coming after Hoyer’s phenomenal sound bite rapid fire that had the audience on its feet continually, Pres. Obama delivered the urgency that all parties must acknowledge, while holding the line against forcing Israel to accept terms through U.N. machinations, which would be disastrous for everyone, but especially U.S. interests.
The Hoyer – Obama team truly was tour de force foreign policy theater. That it came at AIPAC had its own sort of magic.
PHOTO: President Barack Obama talks with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel as they walk from the Oval Office to the South Lawn Drive of the White House, following their meetings, May 20, 2011. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)
The Washington Post has become a propaganda machine and Rubin is so way over the top that many conservatives don’t even take her seriously.
In addition to rebutting Bibi’s spurious charges, Obama’s speech implicitly highlighted how the media played a role in misrepresenting what he actually said during his Mideast speech. Even this morning before the AIPAC speech David Gregory was STILL trying to sell the idea that Obama’s reference to 1967 was some radical departure that threw Israel under the bus. Not surprisingly, Gregory conveniently left out the bit about “land swaps” and the fact that 1967 was a framework to start and that at NO TIME did Obama try to claim that Israel would have to withdraw to 1967 borders. At least Andrea Mitchell tried to get some facts in. But given how the media helped fan the flames, it’s not just Bibi who looks small and petty, but many in the MSM. Thus it will be interesting to see how they react to this speech.
You don’t appear too knowledgeable on the facts or history. Read up a little on it before you spout off. And look at a map too. The Bush letter did not say anything about equal land swaps….rather it talked about changes on the ground that would foreclose going back to the indefensible 67. It also talked about defensible borders. Obama changed words around…and talked not about a “demilitarized” Palestine….but something else. At any rate, Obama gave the Palestinians what they wanted…an improved negotiating position without talking about the Palestinians recognizing Israel as a Jewish state or the not gonna happen right of return. He never spoke of that. He never said what he would do about Hamas either. Bottom line, as usual, Obama wanted to give away negotiating points to the Palestinians. Does that look familiar? Health care anyone? The infrastructure spending that wasn’t? This is all part of a pattern. Labor sees it…and is going its own way with money. Obama puts his friends under the bus and his enemies on top. Nothing new here. And nothing to trust.
You don’t appear too knowledgeable on the facts or history.
You can disagree with SCB if you want, but this is really getting old. That it’s an insult toward someone I happen to know is very informed says a lot more about you than anything else.
You are welcome to post here, but only if you quit make these types of remarks.
You have to wonder, what possible benefit is there to Obama in creating an issue where there was none. Is this his advisors master plan for re-election: ignore the economic and unemployment issues, ignore the social and cultural issues tearing this society apart, ignore creeping right wing facism and instead focus on a problem created by the Western powers that will never be fixed. How many times must we play this stupid game. Yes! it is moronic to think that the Israelie’s should give back land that they won after being attacked; it is equally moronic to act as if this was really their land to begin with! It is ironic that the U.S. has spent ten years fighting terrorism and yet we spend billions defending a state that was created thru terrorism. Every Israelie leader ( Sharon, Rabin, Shamir, Begin, Perez, Dyan, and others were all terrorists. As members of the Irgun they fought a war of attrition against the British and the Arabs. The Israelies will never allow a Palestinian state, never! You are all just wasting your time and everybody elses time. The Middle East is a powder keg and one day it will explode; then as now you and your ilk will be sitting in front of your computers yapping about 1967 borders. Waste your time doing something else.
Smart comment except for the original land part. The British were always aligned with the Arabs. They made Israel small and defenseless because they anticipated the Arabs attacking them. They just assumed the hostile Arabs surrounding Israel would win. And what about the British. Why did they get to carve up the land? Was it all theirs too? The British were awful to the Israelis as they were to others as well. Isn’t the colonialism that so many on the left spout endlessly about due to the British? The point is the one sided focus on the only country in the Middle East with a vibrant democracy that allows all points of view. With the leftists, that counts for little. Of course, the leftists never did much for women’s rights either. And they certainly don’t care about the status of women in Arab lands all that much. All of this talk about Israel is out of proportion….and in fact fails to analyze the entire region and its history. The Jews are the ones who were actually murdered relentlessly through history, culminating in the Nazi Final Solution, of which the Palestinians SUPPORTED. Are you aware of that history? The Arabs all supported the Nazis. Should we ignore that history in both WWI and WWII? If they have never been our allies, and in fact have been enemies of the U.S. in the wars we did fight, why this anguish over the Palestinians, who are really, after all, Arabs. There is no such thing as Palestinians. And the political decision by the Arabs not to absorb them in their society is calculating. The Jews were kicked out of all Arab countries. Very few remain compared to previous numbers. But they were resettled elsewhere. How about the Jews getting back all the land and property that was taken from them by the Arabs. Your one sided position can only reflect a deep seated anti-semitism….because it defies all logical analysis.
The Jews gave back Gaza…what did they get for that? And it was George Bush who pressured them to do it. They got rockets and more. But here you follow a leftist ideology that is hollow. Too bad, many of your other comments not on Israel are perceptive. What happens? This passion against Israel is not rational when compared to other land disputes in the world…or other homelands….No one responds to the Kurdish dilemma…or the occupation of Cyprus by the Turks…
I will tell you a story. Many years ago I had a friend who spent a summer working on a Kibbutz. One day, while cleaning out the chicken house, my friend began to lift the floor boards to clean the chicken crap. His Israelie partner grabbed his arm and with a sly smile said, ” We don’t clean the shit, that’s why we have Arabs. ” This is why there will never be any peace and why it is a waste of time to even argue about it. I am well aware of how disgusting the British are; however, my post wasn’t really about that. As for Gaza, yes, the Israelies gave it back; but what the Israelies have turned Gaza into is another matter. It is essentially a ” ghetto.” It’s surrounded, patrolled by air, by sea and by watch tower. There is a lack of food, health care, jobs; even their tax money is controlled by the Israelies. At any time their houses may be demolished by bulldozer/tanks made by an American company. This is just another form of terrorism. I know you will say this is all a result of the Palestinians electing Hamas; however, electing Hamas was an act of desperation after years of Israelie incursions and intransience. None of this really matters though; there will never be peace, too much blood has been spilled, the hatred runs deep. Finally, you call Israel a democracy; is it really? Yes, they have a very lively parlimentary government. But Israel was founded as a socialist state. To this very day eveything in the state of Israel is subsidized, everthing: employment, health care, education, housing, family, settlements and of course the military. Every Jewish immigrant is awarded a package of subsidies on arrival. Industry, agriculture, import/export, everything. What would some of these right wing extremist republicans say if they knew this ( maybe they do ). This great democracy in the heart of the Middle East is nothing but an evil welfare case who has gotten fat on the largesse of the American taxpayer. I will tell you that personally, I have no objection to a welfare state that takes care of it’s people; we could use a lot more of that in the U.S. But Israel is a democracy only in it’s system of government. In all other respects, it is, and always has been, a socialist state.
Fangio, let’s go start a new country. Taylor, your 2011 quota of the word “incoming” is used up. Give it a rest.
Welcome to Egostan.
obama will need lots of magic come sept
What spurious charges? He gave this speech to fix what he said on Thursday. But in 2008 he told this same organization that under his leadership as President, Jerusalem would remain “undivided.” How do you interpret that? And what about the quartet’s Obama’s words are worthless…and hopefully, Jewish voters in the swing states will recognize that….certainly if there was a credible Republican running…
And what about the quartet’s requirements? Have you forgotten what they are? Clearly, Hamas has no intention of recognizing Israel as a Jewish state, especially since their charter calls for Israel’s destruction. Nor of renouncing terrorism…because in the Hamas vernacular, resistance is OK, i.e. terroristic resistance. These are all word plays….but the facts on the ground illuminate the reality. There is something wrong with the left. The majority of Jews are liberal….but as they see the true face of the left…vis a vis Israel, things may change and money may not be donated. Of course, when the extreme right is busy putting their hands into women’s right to choice, or while putting forth an absurd Ryan budget, things are truly frightening for pragmatic people. It depends on the candidate. But this is a big issue for a lot of people who donate heavily to Democrats. But I’m sure the left can make up the difference…after all, Obama has been so wonderful for the left….aren’t you all jumping for joy at the Patriot Act? Hypocrisy will get you sooner or later. Israel may be the dog you kick now….but you will be the dogs kicked later…by Obama.