President Obama’s claim that “this administration has done more in terms of the security of the state of Israel than any previous administration” is not simply wrong; it is fantastically wrong. It isn’t simply that many presidents – including Truman, Reagan, and George W. Bush – were rightly considered to be far greater friends of Israel than the current occupant of the White House. It is that few presidents, and perhaps no president, has been as instinctively and operationally hostile to Israel as Obama (for more, see Jonathan’s comprehensive post here:).
There are only two possibilities, then. Obama’s claim is either utterly delusional, which is possible; or it is a claim so absurd that it qualifies as cynically misleading. Perhaps because I don’t want to believe the commander-in-chief is living in a world that begins “Once upon a time,” I’ll assume Obama’s claim falls in the second category.
It can now be said Obama will say virtually anything in order to be elected; that at least some of his assertions (made to a crowd of the liberal one percent) are not simply invented out of thin air but qualify as a direct assault on truth and reality.
And just think–we still have 11 months to go before the election. We can only assume this is only a warm-up act for Obama.
I can hardly wait for the main act.
I submit a third possibility, that Obama and his team actually believe that the Palestinitans and their sponsors are sincere about peace and that Israel, especially under the conservative Netanyahu, must give more concessions to achieve that peace. This position implies a hopless naivete, as well as the kind of anti-Semitism required to give credence to the Palestinian position.
This statement is obvious fiction, but what dismays me even more is how no one from the network news services calls Obama out on this. CNN always does its fact checks on Republican candidates, but they head for the hills when Obama deals in deception. Maybe even more troubling is that Obama's host that evening, Jack Rosen continues to be Obama's cheerleader while refusing to confront the truth about this administration's anti-Israel policy.
To quote the great Pamela Geller: n nObama doesn't mean it like this, as is clear from his boasts about all that he has supposedly done to protect Israel. But actually Obama's administration has done more in terms of the security of the State of Israel than any previous administration. He has done more to undermine it.
It is an ouright lie, cynically misleading, to be sure, but something else, too: a Big Lie, an expression of utter contempt, not only for the truth, but a slap in the face for Israel, and a spit in her eye, taunting, mocking, in all of its brazen mendacity, and a portent, a warning of more, and still worse, to come.
There IS nuance to the "cynically misleading" option. Parsed in one way, Israel gets all the military hardware, weapons that America wants Israel to have. Never mind about the gossamer strings attached. One specific definition of "security" so no one feels like a liar. Very lawyerly. n nIn the run-up to the 2008 election, anyone paying attention to the campaign knew Obama's core voter base, and some staff, were proud believers in the palestinian narrative. The one issue that I thought Obama WAS sincere about was nuclear non-proliferation. Sam Nunn, Susan Eisenhower, Chuck Hagel, and Richard Lugar believed him in 2008. n nNow, all that remains is the cynically misleading lawyerly word-parsing on every issue. n n
[continued] nI no longer believe that Obama cares if his legacy as "…the commander-in-chief is living in a world that begins “Once upon a time,” …" as long as that only applies to a vibrant nation that tried to be the Jewish State of Israel. n nSuch is the brain wiring of the post-modern transnational multi-culturalists. nObama is a secular "humanist" who has no interest in history. nHe sees every aspect of the world as "narratives". nAnd probably already has his retirement villa in Norway.
Psalm 109 sentence 8
You said, "It can now be said Obama will say virtually anything in order to be elected; that at least some of his assertions (made to a crowd of the liberal one percent) are not simply invented out of thin air but qualify as a direct assault on truth and reality." n nIt appears to me that 'truth and reality' have been successfully assaulted, assassinated, and assigned to the bone yards of apathy by Obama and practically every other political 'leader' of a catatonic American populace.