Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama Takes It Personally
Jewish Press ^ | 5-21-08

Posted on 05/21/2008 8:21:21 AM PDT by SJackson

By any measure, President Bush’s speech to the Knesset last week on the occasion of Israel’s 60th birthday was nothing short of stunning. This paean to the bond between the United States and Israel, while personal in many ways, went beyond anything any U.S. president had previously said and expressed sentiments that all people of good faith and seekers of peace can relate to and embrace.

The president’s message was that when it comes to Israel, the U.S. would never accommodate terrorist pressure or political importuning from any source, and those who think otherwise had better reevaluate their position. He declared before one and all that “the fight against terror and extremism is the defining challenge of our time” and that America and Israel face a common enemy and are in this fight together.

“America,” he said, “is proud to be Israel’s closest ally and best friend in the world.” He spoke of Jews as “the chosen people” with a homeland promised by God. He praised Israel’s miraculous achievements in all areas of human endeavor and its leadership in several key ones. He referred to Israel as “Eretz Yisrael.”

The president’s speech was an opportunity for Senator Barack Obama to once and for all dispel the uneasiness in pro-Israel circles with his plans for the Middle East and the concern that his ambiguities will encourage those seeking to harm Israel. The venue of the president’s speech was, after all, the Israeli parliament on the occasion of a landmark anniversary for Israel. Was it too much to expect Sen. Obama to say something positive about the occasion?

Sadly, not only did he avoid any reference to Israel, he focused instead on one small portion of Mr. Bush’s speech. It was as if the president had not delivered the most unique speech of its kind in memory.

In his speech, President Bush, referring to the rants and threats of Hamas, Hizbullah, Ahmadinejad and Osama bin Laden, said:

There are good and decent people who cannot fathom the darkness in these men and try to explain their words away. This is natural. But it is deadly wrong. As witnesses to evil in the past, we carry a solemn responsibility to take these words seriously....

Some seem to believe we should negotiate with terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along. We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: “Lord, if only I could have talked to Hitler, all of this might have been avoided.” We have an obligation to call this what it is–the comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history.

Sen. Obama erupted in a high state of umbrage, saying that the reference to “appeasement” was dishonest and divisive” and “exactly the kind of appalling attack that’s divided our country and alienates us from the rest of the world.” Not a word was uttered about anything else in the president’s speech.

It is ironic that it was Sen. Obama himself who put the issue in play. As we noted last week, when asked in an interview why it was that a high Hamas official publicly welcomed his election, he responded:

It’s conceivable that there are those in the Arab world who say to themselves, “This is a guy who spent some time in the Muslim world, has a middle name of Hussein and appears more worldly and has called for talks with people, and so he’s not going to be engaging in the same sort of cowboy diplomacy as George Bush. [Emphasis added]

So maybe the terrorists have a point and it is George W. Bush who is the cause of the world’s ills because he won’t listen to their grievances against the U.S. In fact, Sen. Obama recently told New York Times columnist David Brooks that the U.S. needs a foreign policy that “looks at the root causes of problems and dangers,” adding that Hizbullah and Hamas need to be compelled to understand that “they’re going down a blind alley with violence that weakens their legitimate claims.”

President Bush’s speech at the Knesset was repeatedly interrupted by standing ovations. What he said about Israel was given enhanced significance by the dramatic events in Lebanon as Hizbullah was busy demonstrating its effective control of the country. It was unquestionably an opportunity for Sen. Obama to support those parts of Mr. Bush’s comments about Israel with which he agreed.

Unfortunately, it seems he found little if anything in the speech with which he could agree. And maybe that’s the point he inadvertently made.


TOPICS: Editorial; Israel; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 60thanniversary; appease; appeasement; axis; bhussein; blueturban; history; hussein; israel; knesset; mccain08; muslim; nobama; obama; presidentbush; wot

1 posted on 05/21/2008 8:21:22 AM PDT by SJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: dennisw; Cachelot; Nix 2; veronica; Catspaw; knighthawk; Alouette; Optimist; weikel; Lent; GregB; ..
If you'd like to be on this middle east/political ping list, please FR mail me.

High volume. Articles on Israel can also be found by clicking on the Topic or Keyword Israel, WOT

..................

2 posted on 05/21/2008 8:23:37 AM PDT by SJackson (It is impossible to build a peace process based on blood, Natan Sharansky)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
...“exactly the kind of appalling attack that’s divided our country and alienates us from the rest of the world.”

This nation will remain divided.

There's no way many Americans want to link up with these socialist (communist) America-hating traitors!

3 posted on 05/21/2008 8:24:06 AM PDT by ajodl (If a taxpayer is alive, he's kicking!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #4 Removed by Moderator

To: SJackson

Nobama never read shakespeare then. Methinks he protesteth too much.


5 posted on 05/21/2008 8:24:53 AM PDT by omega4179 (b.hussein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

As Mark Steyn wrote earlier this week....”It says something for Democrat touchiness that the minute a guy makes a generalized observation about folks who appease terrorists and dictators the Dems assume: Hey, they’re talking about me.”


6 posted on 05/21/2008 8:28:20 AM PDT by Mr. Mojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
It’s conceivable that there are those in the Arab world who say to themselves, “This is a guy who spent some time in the Muslim world, has a middle name of Hussein and appears more worldly and has called for talks with people, and so he’s not going to be engaging in the same sort of cowboy diplomacy as George Bush.

Ladies and gentlemen, the "H-Word" has now entered the areana. It is now open season for any Rupublican with the brass to bring it up.

7 posted on 05/21/2008 8:38:12 AM PDT by 50sDad (OBAMA: In your heart you know he's Wright.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

This raises the question: Is there any way to break out the support that is given to John McCain (as the probable most likely intellectual heir to the George W. Bush doctrine), to Herself, still the Cold and Joyless, and to Barack, the Magic Negro, among first the religious and practicing Jews, and to the rather larger number of ethnic but non-practicing Jews?

This would be telling in two ways, first in the dedication that American Jews have for Israel, and more importantly, whether self-interest is a compelling motivation among various segments of this population.

This by itself would not change the outcome of the looming Presidential race, but it would be a good indicator to watch in future political moves.


8 posted on 05/21/2008 8:39:08 AM PDT by alloysteel (Is John McCain headed into the Perfect Storm? You bet he is.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

Obama whines more than McCain did when McCain was a POW. And Obama is either narcissistic or a solipsist who cannot think that Bush had to be talking about him. After all, Bush’s speech about Israel’s 60th anniversary wasn’t about Israel’s history, or the history of the Jews and the West’s failure in the 20th Century, it was all about Obama.


9 posted on 05/21/2008 8:46:54 AM PDT by elhombrelibre (If you liked Carter and you like Kennedy, you'll love Obama.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

“Obama Takes It Personally”

If the shoe fits, wear it.


10 posted on 05/21/2008 8:51:40 AM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: alloysteel

Note that I can think of, in fact I’d be highly skeptical of the results of most polls in that area. Most just don’t get a large enough sample


11 posted on 05/21/2008 8:52:50 AM PDT by SJackson (It is impossible to build a peace process based on blood, Natan Sharansky)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

I was disappointed more of Bush’s speech wasn’t highlighted in the press. I had to seek out an online video to hear more than the single line that seemed to capture all the headlines. Although I cheered when he slapped down the appeasers among us, there was so much more to the speech. As a Christian and supporter of Israel, I was deeply touched. My feelings were bittersweet when Bush said this at the end:

“And you have built a mighty democracy that will endure forever and can always count on the United States of America to be at your side. God bless.”

I hope Israel can continue to count on the U.S. after the next election. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out Obama’s true feelings about Israel.


12 posted on 05/21/2008 8:54:18 AM PDT by chickpundit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

“Obama takes it personally....”

If this socialist gets elected there’s going to be a hell of a lot more he’s going to get to take personally!


13 posted on 05/21/2008 8:59:06 AM PDT by AngelesCrestHighway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

mark


14 posted on 05/21/2008 8:59:38 AM PDT by Christian4Bush ("In Israel, the President hit the nail on the head. The nails are complaining loudly." - John Bolton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

I would be interested to know if the Jewish Press is generally a “mainstream” Jewish publication, or are these writers already right-wing Jews to begin with....


15 posted on 05/21/2008 9:01:07 AM PDT by Notary Sojac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: F15Eagle

Bush’s speech came after a BHO adviser said ‘Jeruselum must be on the table.’
Obama Advisor: Put Jerusalem on Negotiating Table
In the course of Obama’s winding interview with Jeffrey Goldberg yesterday, there was very little discussion of the substantive issues that impede a comprehensive settlement between the Israelis and Palestinians. Obama briefly touched on Israeli settlements, which “at this juncture are not helpful” he said, but made no mention of the security fence, or right of return, or the final status of Jerusalem. What are his positions on these issues? Another Obama advisor speaks out:

Daniel Kurtzer, former ambassador to Israel and advisor of U.S. presidential hopeful Barack Obama, said Tuesday that Jerusalem must be included in peace talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority.

“It will be impossible to make progress on serious peace talks without putting the future of Jerusalem on the table,” Kurtzer said in a conference organized by the Jewish People Policy Planning Institute (JPPPI).

Kurtzer, who has been appointed Obama’s advisor for the Middle East, said that future governments will have to deal with the issue of Jerusalem, as opposed to the current Israeli administration which is not.

JPPPI head and Winograd war panel member Yechezkel Dror said that Jerusalem must become the cultural center of the Jewish people.

Kurtzer said in response that “before we do that, we must first accept a number of facts and the political reality of Arabs who live in East Jerusalem who do not feel part of the city.”

Jerusalem, by Israeli law, is the undivided capital of Israel, and there’s no reason to believe the next government will be any more willing to deal on this point than the last. The J Street contingent will be thrilled to hear that Obama’s advisors have plans to force that government into making painful concessions regardless, but it’s unclear whether Obama shares these views. Would an Obama administration redraw the map of Jerusalem on its own? What if that was the only way to heal the “constant sore” that “infects all of our foreign policy”?

Posted by Michael Goldfarb on May 13, 2008 12:09 PM | Permalink
I’m surprised that the link between Poland and Jerusalum and Chamberlain and Obama isn’t more clear!

Obama also told David Brooks
“There are rarely purely ideological movements out there.”

So what really drives these maniacs, Senator Obama?

This guy doesn’t get it!


16 posted on 05/21/2008 9:05:40 AM PDT by griswold3 (Al queda is guilty of hirabah (war against society) Penalty is death.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Notary Sojac

I’d call it mainstream, but it’s geared toward the right.


17 posted on 05/21/2008 9:07:28 AM PDT by SJackson (It is impossible to build a peace process based on blood, Natan Sharansky)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Mojo

Obama is a trained organizer, trained in the Saul Alinsky style. Personalizing an issue is part of the technique.


18 posted on 05/21/2008 9:18:53 AM PDT by Eva (CHANGE- the post modern euphemism for Marxist revolution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: chickpundit
It was an excellent speech, one of his best. Posted here
19 posted on 05/21/2008 9:19:30 AM PDT by SJackson (It is impossible to build a peace process based on blood, Natan Sharansky)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
Hizbullah and Hamas need to be compelled to understand that “they’re going down a blind alley with violence that weakens their legitimate claims.”

And which legitimate claims would those be? That we are Christians and Jews therefore we most be killed?

20 posted on 05/21/2008 9:20:26 AM PDT by BubbaBasher (No matter who wins, we lose.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
Obama is getting money from these terrorist like the Clinton's got money from the Chinese..I'll bet if this was checked into everyone would find out he is doing a Clinton only it is with terrorist not with the Chinese..If something isn't done about this demon we will see the end of the world..

The news media had better watch out because their days are numbered too if this Muslim gets into the white house..He and his terrorist friends will cut off all news from any place like they do in the other countries..Laugh if you like but I really believe this..He has ignorant people that do not know what is going on in this world voting for him..much like the Clinton's did but even worse..

21 posted on 05/21/2008 9:28:47 AM PDT by PLD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zot; Interesting Times

An excellent article.


22 posted on 05/21/2008 9:39:56 AM PDT by GreyFriar ( 3rd Armored Division - Spearhead)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson; All
This is off-topic, but concerns Obama.

Why don't we seize the opportunity provided by the MSM's deification of Obama to permanently de-claw the IRS and get God back into the public school classrooms?

This post (<-click), while addressing taxes, helps to explain why government "leaders" like Obama are actually in contempt of the Constitution that they have sworn to defend, foolishly following in the footsteps of FDR's dirty federal spending politics.

In fact, the article referenced below shows that Obama is the #1 federal spending proposer in the Senate for '08; Clinton is #2.

Obama, a big-shot federal spender
And this post (<-click) exposes how corrupt justices then began using FDR's politically correct license to ignore the 10th A. to unlawfully stifle traditional family values, including the USSC's scandalous legalization of abortion in Roe v. Wade. Note that the post first references two non-abortion cases in order to show Roe v. Wade in a different, troubling perspective.

In fact, consider that the states have the constitutional power (10th A.) to authorize public schools to lead non-mandatory (14th A.) classroom discussions on the pros and cons of evolution, creationism and ID, as examples, regardless that atheists, separatists, pagan-minded judges and the MSM are misleading the people to think that doing such things in public schools is unconstitutional.

The people need to reconnect with the Founder's division of federal and state government powers. The people then need to wise up to the major problems that, since the days of FDR's dirty politics, Congress has not only not been operating within the restraints of the federal Constitution, particularly where constitutionally unauthorized federal spending is concerned, but the USSC has wrongly been ignoring the 10th A. protected power of the states to address religious issues.

The bottom line is that the people need to get in the faces of judges, demanding that judges uphold their oaths to defend the 10th A. protected powers of the states to address religious issues - or get off the bench. The people also need to send big-shot, Constitution-ignoring federal spenders like Obama home as opposed to trying to send people like him to the Oval Office. The people need to get in the faces of members of Congress, demanding a stop to constitutionally unauthorized federal spending while appropriately lowering federal taxes - or get out of DC.

Lincoln put it this way.

"We the People are the rightful master of both congress and the courts - not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution." --Abraham Lincoln, Political debates between Lincoln and Douglas, 1858.

23 posted on 05/21/2008 9:43:34 AM PDT by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 50sDad
Ladies and gentlemen, the "H-Word" has now entered the areana. It is now open season for any Rupublican with the brass to bring it up.

The intersection between "Republican" and "brass" is the null set.

24 posted on 05/21/2008 9:48:50 AM PDT by thulldud (Insanity: Electing John McCain again and expecting a different result.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: chickpundit
I was disappointed more of Bush’s speech wasn’t highlighted in the press. I had to seek out an online video ...

The press NEVER covers THIS President! I always GO HERE to read exactly what President Bush says, in it's entirety and watch the complete videos when available. The thunderous applause for President Bush speaks volumes.

25 posted on 05/21/2008 9:49:11 AM PDT by Just A Nobody (PISSANT for President '08 - NEVER AGAIN...Support our Troops! Beware the ENEMEDIA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: All

Awesome video:

The same kind of terrorists who support Obama did this:
http://www.frugalsites.net/911/attack/
Never apologize for them.
Never appease them.
Never forget.


26 posted on 05/21/2008 10:01:01 AM PDT by cyberella
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: All

Awesome video:

The same kind of terrorists who support Obama did this:
http://www.frugalsites.net/911/attack/
Never apologize for them.
Never appease them.
Never forget.


27 posted on 05/21/2008 10:01:43 AM PDT by cyberella
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

Comment #28 Removed by Moderator

To: F15Eagle

Wake up-America! Do you not wonder why the immature Obama gets so upset when He feels HE is attacked.

He is so inexperienced. Remember the little kid in school who thought he knew everything, yet he couldn’t pass the most simple test. Well, here is Obama.

God help us.


29 posted on 05/21/2008 10:27:31 AM PDT by DaltonNC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: F15Eagle

Wake up-America! Do you not wonder why the immature Obama gets so upset when He feels HE is attacked.

He is so inexperienced. Remember the little kid in school who thought he knew everything, yet he couldn’t pass the most simple test. Well, here is Obama.

God help us.


30 posted on 05/21/2008 10:27:37 AM PDT by DaltonNC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Eva

I’m glad to see somebody else remembers the Alinsky connection. We are underestimating Obama if we don’t realize that he is fully a master of this vicious, completely unscrupulous, leftist style of getting his way. He may know nothing about world affairs, nothing about government, but as far as the manipulation of crowds and public opinion, he trained with the best.


31 posted on 05/21/2008 10:27:43 AM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: BubbaBasher

Don’t know what Obama’s idea of their “legitimate claims” are, but in Lebanon it’s that Shi’a are disenfranchised from Lebanese society.


32 posted on 05/21/2008 10:32:20 AM PDT by forkinsocket
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: All
Headline? Obama offended by White House conference on illegal drugs
"Bush & McCain are trying to trick people into believing that I am a drug dealer."

Washington, D.C. "Leave Barack alone!" sobbed one supporter. . . .

33 posted on 05/21/2008 10:37:28 AM PDT by WilliamofCarmichael (If modern America's Man on Horseback is out there, Get on the damn horse already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BubbaBasher

He’ll find something to negotiate. Sheikh Yassin, before his well deserved death, stated that if the Jews returned to Europe that Hamas wouldn’t pursue them there. That could be Obama’s basis for negotiations. Where they’ll go once Europe falls can be dealt with at that time.


34 posted on 05/21/2008 10:58:34 AM PDT by SJackson (It is impossible to build a peace process based on blood, Natan Sharansky)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Amendment10
This is off-topic, but concerns Obama....Lincoln put it this way.

I'll throw another "off-topic" comment out there for Hillary and Obama, who thinks he's like Lincoln.

Like Obama, Seward was the clear favorite going into the convention. The unelected super-delegates chose Lincoln. And the Dems, as McCain suggested the other day, their first convention failed to name a nominee, though subsequent conventions named two, Douglas and Breckinridge. Perhaps Obama's emulation of Lincoln will prove true on the electorial side.

In Lincoln's rise from poverty, his ultimate mastery of language and law, his capacity to overcome personal loss and remain determined in the face of repeated defeat--in all this he reminded me not just of my own struggles
Barak Obama

35 posted on 05/21/2008 11:24:20 AM PDT by SJackson (It is impossible to build a peace process based on blood, Natan Sharansky)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: GreyFriar

Thanks. This helps explain why the president’s speech shook up the anti-Israel leftists so thoroughly.


36 posted on 05/21/2008 11:25:26 AM PDT by Interesting Times (Swiftboating, you say? Check out ToSetTheRecordStraight.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: livius

Obama’s first job, after graduating from Columbia was for the Gemaliel foundation, a group that trains community activists in the Saul Alinsky organizing methods. Obama has always been very good at it.

He is trying to completely control the campaign discussion by making everything personal and discussing to policy. He doesn’t even have a policy, other than that of the Black Liberation Theology.

This is an excerpt from an article by Stanley Kurtz on the Ethics and Public Policy web site. It gives you an idea of what Obama has in mind for this country.


The black intellectual’s goal, says Cone, is to “aid in the destruction of America as he knows it.” Such destruction requires both black anger and white guilt. The black-power theologian’s goal is to tell the story of American oppression so powerfully and precisely that white men will “tremble, curse, and go mad, because they will be drenched with the filth of their evil.” In the preface to his 1970 book, A Black Theology of Liberation, Wright wrote: “There will be no peace in America until whites begin to hate their whiteness, asking from the depths of their being: ‘How can we become black?’”


37 posted on 05/21/2008 12:14:20 PM PDT by Eva (CHANGE- the post modern euphemism for Marxist revolution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: griswold3

After our country was attacked on 9/11 the best candidate the dems could offer us was a terror appeasing fake christian muslim socialist.


38 posted on 05/21/2008 12:34:08 PM PDT by omega4179 (b.hussein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ajodl

“There’s no way many Americans want to link up with these socialist (communist) America-hating traitors!”

We don’t need to “link up” with them....we have enough already running the country.


39 posted on 05/21/2008 2:24:39 PM PDT by SAMS ("I may look harmless, but I raised a U.S. MARINE!" Army Wife & Marine Mom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GreyFriar

Thanks for the ping. Obama took it personally because he knows it applies to him.


40 posted on 05/21/2008 3:02:35 PM PDT by zot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Eva
A Black Theology of Liberation, Wright wrote: “There will be no peace in America until whites begin to hate their whiteness, asking from the depths of their being: ‘How can we become black?’”

And the press wonders why whites are not voting for Obama - who got rid of his own whiteness early on as soon as he realized it wouldn't benefit him politically. Too bad about his grandmother, but she was expendable.

41 posted on 05/21/2008 3:17:33 PM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: omega4179
After our country was attacked on 9/11 the best candidate the dems could offer us was a terror appeasing fake christian muslim socialist.

I was going to remind you that Kerry came before BO, then I thought...

...Hey you did describe Kerry too (although I don't think he's muslim)

42 posted on 05/21/2008 4:09:44 PM PDT by SteamShovel (Global Warming, the New Patriotism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Cicero

As a Presidential Canidate he should not take it personally. Look at President Bush. They have slimed him for eight years but GOD BLESS HIM for never wavering or taking it personally.


43 posted on 05/21/2008 4:14:59 PM PDT by ncfool (Savage said that Islam is a Peaceful religion. Your very peaceful after they slit your throat!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
"...adding that Hizbullah and Hamas need to be compelled to understand that “they’re going down a blind alley with violence that weakens their legitimate claims.”

Please tell us, Mr. Obama, what do you think are the legitimate claims of Hizbullah and Hamas?

44 posted on 05/21/2008 4:34:15 PM PDT by SupplySider
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
It just goes to show that amongst his many other faults, Obama is not ready for prime time. There are important events occurring in the Middle East, the President of the United States makes a well-received speech before the Knesset regarding these events, and all Obama can get out of it is a possible, not even probable, reference to to a statement that he himself made, a word that he himself used. He's a small-time politician from the parochial Chicago machine pretending to be one of the big boys. He's getting by on a veneer of "style", but anyone looking deeper (and not many of his supporters seem to have the intelligence to do so)would see that there's no substance. He's a slick pretender, and in no way ready to be leader of the free world. The Democrats (the supporters and self-important pundits, not the ones with the real power, above Obama's pay grade) think this is a game.
45 posted on 05/21/2008 6:42:11 PM PDT by mrsmel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ncfool

Well, there’s another difference. As you say, the moonbats are constantly calling President Bush a Nazi, and he ignores it with dignity, standing above the fray.

But the reverse didn’t happen. Bush didn’t say that Obama was a pacifier. He never mentioned any names, and could easily have been talking about Carter or many other prominent liberals. But Obama took it personally, and said, “Don’t call ME a pacifier!” Bush in fact never called him anything.


46 posted on 05/21/2008 7:52:22 PM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson