Thursday, May 26, 2011

Two Words that Changed President Obama into President George H.W. Bush

While the Valley was down, I was keeping up with the news of the Obama-Bibi meetings. 

Now that the Valley has returned, I noticed how President Obama turned into a copy of President Bush Pere.  How?

Two words. 

The First Word
First let's start with President Obama's Mideast Speech:

 And here is the transcript.

And here are the words that stand out:

"The borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states. The Palestinian people must have the right to govern themselves, and reach their potential, in a sovereign and contiguous state.

"As for security, every state has the right to self-defense, and Israel must be able to defend itself – by itself – against any threat. Provisions must also be robust enough to prevent a resurgence of terrorism; to stop the infiltration of weapons; and to provide effective border security. The full and phased withdrawal of Israeli military forces should be coordinated with the assumption of Palestinian security responsibility in a sovereign, non-militarized state,"

Note the highlighted word: 1967. 

President Obama may be a Constitutional scholar (still unproven, see Libya; Non-use of War Powers Act), but he is not a history major. 

In 1967, Twelve (Yes, TWELVE) Arab countries and allies went after Israel for six daysIsrael won the war and the land. 

What did Israel get in return for the Gaza Strip?


Let's take a look at a Map of Israel circa 1967:

Now let's take a look at Israel today (circa 2011):

Now President Obama gave a speech at AIPAC;  Here is a portion of it:

"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. (Applause.) That’s what mutually agreed-upon swaps means. 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 44 years. (Applause.) It allows the parties themselves to take account of those changes, including the new demographic realities on the ground, and the needs of both sides. The ultimate goal is two states for two people: Israel as a Jewish state and the homeland for the Jewish people — (applause) — and the State of Palestine as the homeland for the Palestinian people — each state in joined self-determination, mutual recognition, and peace. (Applause.)"

The question for American Jews of voting age is:

Was President Obama telling the truth in his State Department speech or was he lying? 

For someone touted as an intelligent speech maker, he needs a lot of help telling the public "What he really means,"  A LOT.

 In 1992, President Bush pere angered the American Jewish population by the words of his Secretary of State.  The Jewish voting population remembered election time

Before we leave the word 1967, again I ask, was he telling the truth in his State department speech or was he lying?

We Jews should know by October 2012. 

The Second Word

I was originally going to compare President Obama to Mayor Dinkins or Mayor James Hahn, but peer to peer always seems to work.  Hence, POTUS to POTUS. 

This word lies the seeds of his future defeat.  It will cause the modern democrats to sink like a stone for quite a while electorally. 

That word is RAAAAACIST!

President Obama was sold as a post-racial candidate who would move America beyond the cries of Reverend Sharpton and Reverend Jesse Jackson Sr. 

But every time he was opposed; By the Hillary! supporters; By the Republicans in Congress and in media; By the Tea partiers and finally everyone else, the word came upon his partisans lips. 

If you cry RAAAACIST, you are doing nothing to solve the problem (If you really hate people by skin color, gender, creed, or anything, get the hell out of here -- you are a racist, etc.).  If you hate racism so damn much, change the person that is. 


It's being used as a tune to shut up opposition. 

We will speak louder in 2012 then in 2009. 

For want of two words, the Obama Presidency was lost.

My question: With the Obama coalition broken, which Republican will build a new coalition? And what will that coalition look like?

Bookmark and Share

No comments:

Post a Comment

Welcome to the Valley! Please comment about the post and keep to the subject.

There is only one person (JSF) keeping track of comments, so as long as what you write is civil and close to the purpose of the post, you will see it.

Keep this in mind: Politics should not be Personal; then you have a place here.

Write! History will remember your words!


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...