First of all we have this piece of brilliance:
When Barack Obama ran for president he stood up before the Jewish world and lied through his teeth. He said:..."Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel and it must remain undivided"...
By contrast, in Mitt Romney's recent trip to that city he said:Well it is true that President Obama made the comment cited above regarding Jerusalem (same as Mittens did) while on the campaign trail... and horror of horrors, the President has not changed U.S. policy in this regard from U.S.policy in the past thirty five years. Well imagine that. A politician not fulfilling a campaign promise. What will happen next... the sky will turn blue? Water will continue to be Wet?
It is a deeply moving experience to be in Jerusalem, the capital of Israel...
This piece of propaganda however is followed up with commentary and a whole piece about President Obama lying to the American Public and trumpeting the true Jewish "friendlness" of Mitt Romney. Unfortunately.. it is complete and utter horseshit. Let's see why.
First of all, complaining about President Obama lying about anything and then comparing that to Mitt Romney is positively laughable. Don't forget the fact that Willard has taken three sides on every issue imaginable and has the consistency of total chaos. But even better... After saying this Mitt refused to say this is what he would do. When questioned regarding his recognition of Jerusalem as the Capital of Israel Romney had this to say:
"I think it's long been the policy of our country to ultimately have our embassy in the nation's capital, Jerusalem. The decision to actually make the move is one, if I were president, I would want to take in consultation with the leadership of the (Israeli) government which exists at that time. So I would follow the same policy we have in the past (vb1 emphasis)."
Wait... what??? So basically Mitt Romney would do EXACTLY what President Obama is doing. ROH-ROH, So when President Obama says this.. he is lying through his teeth. When serial liar Mitt Romney says it.... He is doing what exactly?
I mean is the problem that the President didn't follow through on a campaign promise and so we shouldn't vote for him because he missed that one? If that is the case then there would be ZERO politicians who would be deserving of our votes. Further... the author of this is actually asserting that Mitt Romney of all people WOULD keep his campaign promises? Mitt Romney, the man who will say anything to get elected? Seriously? WOW!
Then the author goes to double down on "Teh Stoopid":
In response progressives, including Jewish progressives, claimed that this represents a "gaffe" that is deeply insulting to the perpetually insulted Palestinians.Being a Jewish Progressive - we don't claim that this is a "gaffe". It is just laughable that on one hand Mr. Romney would say we (America) should call Jerusalem the Capital of Israel - the problems that this official designation at this time aside (though I think we should call West Jerusalem the Capital - I have no issue there) and complain about the Obama administration not doing this. Then on the other hand conveniently leave out that Mittens said that he would do EXACTLY the same thing as the Obama Administration.
The "gaffe" that Progressive Jews point out refer to is when Romney talked about "superior cultures" and attributed that to the Palestinians without acknowledging the role played in economic suppression of the Palestinians by both Israel and it's sister Arab nations. AND then Romney went on to insult Mexicans and others in his explanation. Further, now is dicey time in American relations in the Middle East. Iran is attempting to influence the region and gain overriding control in the area. Pissing off all the Arab nations for a symbolic gesture at time when America needs all the allies it can muster against Iran is probably one of the DUMBEST things a President can do.
Ok so there is that, but then it gets better. The lunacy continues...
The very first obligation of any leader is to defend his or her people. A leader who cannot be trusted to do that cannot be trusted to do anything whatsoever. If liberal diaspora Jewry is so weak that they will not stand with Israelis on the question of Jerusalem then it very much highlights the split between us.Wait... WHAT???? Come again? The President of the U.S. is the leader of World Wide Jewry? Or wait if Mitt Romney gets elected does that mean he is the leader of World Wide Jewry? Who knew? Here's a note to the author of this article. Jews that live in America are Americans. The President of the United States has an obligation to defend ALL of the people of the United States, not just Jewish people. At the current time that is exactly what he is and has been doing - defending Americans (and as a bonus through President Obama's exceptional support for Israeli anti-Missle defense systems also defending Israeli lives).
Ok... this keeps going... we get this gem:
Most Israelis do not much like or trust Barack Obama for the simple reason that Obama has proven himself untrustworthy.
Israelis, because they live there, are much stronger on security and other issues revolving around the Arab-Israel conflict and they most definitely have the ability to discern who their friends are and who their friends are not. Most Israelis do not much like or trust Barack Obama for the simple reason that Obama has proven himself untrustworthy.Hmmm.... so the one time Prime Minister of Israel and current Defense Minister Ehud Barak, and the Two time Prime Minister and President of Israel Shimon Peres don't have the ability to discern who their friends are and who their enemies are? Really? Interesting I guess then when they say:
BARAK: I should tell you honestly that this administration under President Obama is doing, in regard to our security, more than anything that I can remember in the past. … In terms of the support for our security, the cooperation of our intelligence, the sharing of sorts in a very open way even when there are differences.they are praising their enemy... eh? But this one gets even better. When someone makes the claim that "Most Israelis do not much like or trust Barack Obama it is good to back that one up with facts. UNLESS.. .one doesn't understand what the word "Most" means. In fact, "Most" Israelis (at least according to the Jerusalem Post Poll of 2011) APPROVE of Barak Obama by a 54%-39% spread. So I guess "most" means something under 50%. Again... new definitions abound...
PERES: When I look at the record of President Obama concerning the major issues, security, I think it’s a highly satisfactory record, from an Israeli point of view.
The thing that is amazing is that the author of this article who takes the American diaspora to task for it's support of President Obama only does so over the issue of Jerusalem, as if that issue is the be all end all for the State of Israel. He uses all the idiotic rhetoric about how "Jews in the diaspora need to be tougher and grow a spine" or some such nonsense like that. Well here is a newsflash for our little tough friend:
Telling us that supporting the excellent friendship that the Obama Administration has shown to Israel is spineless is patently ridiculous (like the rest of this P.O.S. article). The Obama Administration has shown time and time again just how supportive of Jewish Americans and Israel it is. It has been (as Ehud Barak says) an "exceptional friend" to our people.
The lies, gross distortions and outright buffoonery of this not only needs to be questioned but it seriously needs to be countered and that is what I and the rest of us at PZ are doing here.
Speaking of which, when the Shrub was running for president, he promised to move the embassy to Jerusalem. In fact, he promised to get the process started as soon as he was sworn in -- so he told JTA, AIPAC, Bnai Brith, the AJC, and others. Eight years as president and he couldn't be bothered?
ReplyDeleteIf you look at things simply, there's no legitimate reason not to move the embassy to Jerusalem. That's what Israel says is its capital -- and every nation on the planet gets to choose its own capital. And it's also where Israel's national government is located -- in West Jerusalem. Which means that anyone who disputes Israel's right to sovereignty there is effectively claiming that Jews, unlike any other people on the planet, have no right to self-determination in the land of their heritage and so is an antisemite.
So why is it that Clinton, Bush, and Obama have all refused to implement the Jerusalem Embassy Act? It's not like this is some bizarre notion of liberalism run amok, as some dunces have suggested -- neither Clinton nor Obama is all that liberal, and only the most deluded teabaggers even hint at Bush being a liberal. Bottom line, the move has national security implications, and besides that, any US administration that has even the vaguest hope of mediating the I/P conflict can't do it. It may not be fair that moving the embassy to Jerusalem would be perceived as favoritism instead of merely recognition of reality, but anyone who still thinks life is fair in this day and age ought to see me about some real estate in South Florida.
The bottom line is that America should move its embassy to Jerusalem. Obama's not gonna do it, but anyone who thinks that Mittens is going to do it needs to have their head examined. Which Mitt do they expect to do this? The Mitt that supported, in fact pioneered the individual mandate, or the Mitt that thinks it is the worst thing ever? The Mitt that was militantly pro-choice, or the Mitt that is militantly pro-life? The Mitt that is pro-gun control or the one that is anti- gun control?
DeleteAnyone who trust Mitt Romney to follow through on a promise or any position has some serious problems with reality. He's backed out of his promise on Jerusalem already and it has been, what, one day?
Wiscmass... this is an excellent comment. It just shows the sheer level of ignorance of those that demand this at this time. It's like they simply don't understand a darn thing about international relations, history or anything else. It's just "damn the torpedo's full speed straight ahead - Right off the cliff"...
DeleteFiz... As wiscmass said... they should move the embassy to West Jerusalem but that would be tough move right now. I agree - that is where it should be as well. However, in time it will be. We just need to be patient.
As for Mitt... apparently they are not familiar with his habits for telling two different tales often times within minutes of each other. Just look at the "culture" comment. First... Mitt says that it is "culture" that is to blame. Then he walks it back, within a day.. .THEN he writes an article in National Review saying that it is indeed "culture". What the heck are we to think?
Now his latest is that Syria is Iran's gateway to the Sea... Heh.. Someone better tell the Iranian Navy that. Just think... they thought all this time that they were sailing on water. Good thing Mitt is there to tell them they are just imagining that.
(livosh1)
ReplyDeleteMoving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem is a campaign issue? How silly. The desperation of the ODS crowd (and their Republican Party operative friends) to find a wedge issue is astounding. Total fail.
I've just been infuriated by the frothing nonsense about this. "Obama lied, but we can TELL that Mitt is telling the truth...even though Bush wasn't...but we can TELL this time..."
ReplyDeleteHow desperate does a person have to be to look at Mitt Romney and see someone who cares even marginally about Israel?
Well pretty desperate or definitely out of one's mind... But remember this is ODS (Obama Derangement Syndrome) we are dealing with (well that and bigotry towards Barack HUSSEIN Obama). Reality and the opinion that Mitt Romney would be a better friend to Israel than President Obama have nothing in common with one another.
DeleteThe funny thing is that the loons keep insisting on Jerusalem as some sort of defining point and all the while they are praising Mittens... they seem to simply ignore the fact that he went back on his promise four hours after he made it (big surprise there) and said that he would continue the same policy of previous administrations.
So, I don't know if I would call what they think as desperation as much as I would say it's a combination of ignorance, prejudice, and sheer insanity.