Obama Blocks Out Israeli “Noise” on Iran

In separate interviews broadcast last night on CBS’s “60 Minutes,” President Obama and Mitt Romney aired their differences on a host of issues. While much of the exchange consisted of the usual talking points on the economy from the two candidates, perhaps the most significant statement uttered (the complete transcript can be read here) was when the president was asked about the calls from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to state specific red lines about Iran’s nuclear threat that would trigger U.S. action:

When it comes to our national security decisions, any pressure that I feel is simply to do what’s right for the American people. And I am going to block out any noise that’s out there. Now I feel an obligation, not pressure but obligation, to make sure that we’re in close consultation with the Israelis on these issues because it affects them deeply. They’re one of our closest allies in the region. And we’ve got an Iranian regime that has said horrible things that directly threaten Israel’s existence.

While the second half of that answer sought to paper over the differences between his administration and Israel, there can be no doubt about the import of the first half. It was not only a clear statement from the president that he will not allow himself to be influenced by Netanyahu’s sense of urgency about Iran, but a not-so-subtle attempt to play the “Israel Lobby” card by asserting that he would do “what’s right for the American people.” The implication of this is that what’s good for America is not what’s good for Israel and if Netanyahu doesn’t like it, he can lump it.

0
Shares
Google+ Print

Obama Blocks Out Israeli “Noise” on Iran

Must-Reads from Magazine

The False Backlash Over Anonymous Sources

Rational skepticism or partisan angst?

To hear Donald Trump’s supporters tell it, the story these days isn’t the story, but how the story is sourced.

3
Shares
Google+ Print

The Next Lebanon War Will be Different

Iran and Hezbollah are calling the shots.

It’s now been more than a decade since Hezbollah launched a cross-border attack on Israel and precipitated a war that devastated south Lebanon and parts of Beirut. That war ended with the acceptance of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701, which called for the “disarmament of all armed groups in Lebanon,” including Lebanese Hezbollah and the assertion of full control over Lebanese territory by the government of Lebanon.

38
Shares
Google+ Print

Theatrics, Outrage, and Normalcy

The Trump budget: "Hateful," "immoral," and an "attack" on Americans.

Five months into the Trump presidency, it does feel as though life has been moving along at a record pace. Following the breakneck speed with which scandals and controversies involving the Trump administration are revealed, examined, and subsumed into a broader narrative has been a struggle. It’s a welcome break, then, that the release of Donald Trump’s proposed budget has ushered in a familiar dynamic in Washington. Democrats have shifted from expressing grave and honest concerns about the president’s conduct to feigning outsize indignation over the president’s priorities. It’s a happy return to normalcy.

6
Shares
Google+ Print

A ‘Diversity’ Power Play

A Marxian interpretation of "diversity."

The University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire, a middling Midwestern state university, is not a hotbed of radicalism. Yet it recently joined a handful of other colleges and universities that consider a demonstrated commitment to “equity, diversity, and inclusion” a criterion for earning tenure.

10
Shares
Google+ Print

The Shame of Defaming Seth Rich

The conspiracy theorizing has to stop.

Seth Rich was 27 when he was killed on a dark street in a sketchy neighborhood in the nation’s capital last July. He has become world-famous in the past month because his corpse is being used as a proxy in the war over the reputation of Donald J. Trump. Enraged media figures on the Right who believe Trump is being unjustly accused of colluding with Russia have turned to the Rich story to offer their audiences an alternate potential crime to chew on—one in which they can hint at the possibility that Democrats had one of their own killed.