In the Wall Street Journal, Kimberly Strassel lists numerous instances of Obamnesia – reversals by the candidate currently running for re-election on grounds of trust. She did not include any reversals relating to Israel, perhaps because they are legendary by now.
In 2008, Obama made his “let me be clear” commitment to an undivided Jerusalem – and then walked away from it. These days he won’t even identify Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. He committed himself to “defensible borders” for Israel; but once in office, one of his many attempted humiliations of Israel’s prime minister was to endorse the Palestinian position on borders – the day before the prime minister arrived to meet with him. Last month, he declined to find time in his schedule to meet with the prime minister on his trip to the United States. And by the way, other countries noticed that.
Near the top of any list of memorable moments of Obamnesia is this 2010 exchange with the prime minister, after the president had omitted Israel from the itineraries of his multiple trips to the region:
PRIME MINISTER NETANYAHU: … I want to thank you, too, for the great hospitality you and the First Lady have shown Sara and me and our entire delegation. And I think we have to redress the balance — you know, I’ve been coming here a lot. It’s about time –
PRESIDENT OBAMA: I’m ready.
PRIME MINISTER NETANYAHU: — you and the First Lady came to Israel, sir.
PRESIDENT OBAMA: We look forward to it. Thank you.
PRIME MINISTER NETANYAHU: Any time.
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Thank you very much. Thank you.
The trip has yet to occur. It is not even in the glossy second-term agenda just issued by the president. Perhaps we should describe the “I’m ready” commitment – made more than two years ago – as a case of instantaneous Obamnesia; it was clear even at the time that he was not going to be visiting Israel. He rejected pleas to visit made by liberal Israeli commentators, by every Jewish Democrat in the House of Representatives, and by a group of friendly rabbis.
Having rejected so many suggestions that he visit; having disregarded so many opportunities to do so; and having ignored even a personal invitation from the head of state, it is obvious that this instance of Obamnesia is at a very late stage.
I think at this point, it is pretty clear that any Jew voting for Obama is a Jew in name only. Listening to some of my own family members (Jewish and Catholic!) do the verbal gymnastics necessary to vote for this guy has become tiresome and sad…
Jewish support for Obama is not unlike Jewish support, and ongoing reverence, for former president franklin roosevelt, new york times, and reform Judaism whose central tenet is a separation of their pseudo-Judaism from the Jewish people, i.e., reform Judaism does not believe that the Jewish people ARE a people. n nRather, reform Judaism believes that the religion can be adopted, and discarded, at will without any regard for Jewish history, heritage, lineage or family. n nAs regards roosevelt and ny times, they are sadly complicit in the shameful failure of the United States to even consider Jewish lives worthy of any redemption from the murderous claws of the germans, and their allies. n n
Someone once said that there is no Reform Judaism, only deformed Judaism. (Wasn't the original name Reformed Judaism, btw?) n nOthers have asked if a reformed drunk no longer drinks, a reformed gambler no longer gambles and reformed crook no longer steals, what does a Reformed Jew do?
The president has had many opportunities to visit Israel and show his support for the Jewish state. He has refused to do so. n nI think he actually believes, viscerally, that the Arab nations will see him more favorably because he has separated himself from Israel. Mr. Obama firmly believes that Arabs will be better disposed to negotiate if the U.S. is distanced from Israel. This, of course, shows his naivete because the Arabs will only seek peace as a last alternative. n nThe reality is that Arab nations, and then the Palestinians, will better negotiate and seek peace when that is in their best interests. And peace is of interest to a nation when war is clearly a losing position. For now, war is not clearly a losing position because the U.S. is telling Arabs that if they but wait a little more, Israel will weaken more. Under Mr. Obama, the U.S. will continually push Israel to a weaker position be it with land giveaways, unfaithful support at the U.N., economic disruptions, or even allowing Iran to have nuclear weapons. n nInstead of moving toward peace, Mr. Obama's actions would only lead to war. The world can thank Mr. Obama for making the Middle East less safe because he is distancing the U.S. from Israel. The Arab nations see it and they like what they see.
I think Obama's dad considered himself an 'arab', and was considered one in Kenya the same way one set of muslim blacks in Sudan consider themselves arabs and superior to another set who are not muslim and 'not arab'. They may have some arab blood but by American standards or to Amercain eyes they would all be 'black'. n nIt is too much of a stretch that Obama, who had dreams from his father, considers himself Arab in some way? n nSome day, it will all be so clear, and people will wonder how they never saw it.
Forgot to add: an official visit to Israel, which would strengthen Israel in some way, would be a betrayal of his father and likely Obama's core principles. Perhaps it is also one of the reasons (there are many others no doubt, some related to deep insecurities) why he cannot countenance being in the presence of Netanyahu, an archetypal warrior/leader of the Jews, if you think about it. n nOne of the wonderful things about Obama – OK, the only wonderful thing – is that he lets those of us so inclined to play amateur psychoanalysis.
It is becoming more appreciated, at least from some recent articles, that the father-child relationship is crucial to the development of the child. In the past, the father was often expendable in the sense that if the mother was there, the father was somehow irrelevant. Now, that's no longer believed. (Mothers are crucial, of course, but they do not replace fathers.) n nSo, while you're playing armchair psychologist, there is something there of how a child views and relates to his father. You're not off-base in bringing this up. n
Jerusalem is the point that sticks.
Any one who believe that Pr. O has any positive feeling for IL is delusional.r nHe has been brainwashed by his ME friends for so many years and the invasion of his administration by Muslims should convinced any one where his heart is.r nThe American Jewish democrats of today are no different from 40-45. IL for them is a major headache. Lets not kid ourselves.
Obama in first term got terrible political blowback from his wanting "to do a (pent up) number" on Israel. He eventually slunk back to a somewhat proper political place in relation to Israel so fearful was he of political damage inhibiting his reelection, itself a now a 50/50 coin toss. Should he get reelected with that political constraint gone, hang on to your hat. It bodes very poorly–another reason not to vote for him.