Discussion for article #233498
Send a right-wing Repub to AIPAC, preferably a potential/pretend 2016 presidential candidate - Palin, Trump - in answer to the invite. Iām sure Hillary already has one.
Canāt anyone here play this game? Deny the visa! Obama: āThere is only one foreign policy for the United States, and that is set by the President. You want to run foreign policy, win an election. I will not tolerate this disrespect to me, to the people that voted for me, and to the office of the Presidency.ā
And then no more comments. Jesus how hard can it be?
2 Likes
Just a thought, but I wonder if thereās anything to gain by Obama going to Israel while Bibi is here. He could address the Liberal party or the Parliament (if that can be arranged), and he can suck the air in Israel out of anything Bibi is saying over here.
3 Likes
No. Itās definitely NOT that easy. Do that and āno more commentsā will most definitely NOT follow or work.
First, denying the Beebās a visa will just turn Fox into a 24/7 Free Speech for Jews channel for several weeks of the old fairnbalanced. The Erpublican party has been after taking away or at least splintering the American Jewish vote for a century, and thereās absolutely no way they wouldnāt try to expoit such an apparent opening to a truly epic extent.
Which in turn would resonate with the Congressional GOPers themselvs, who would be all for turning this into a gigantic wooden horse to wheel into the battles against Obamacare, Obamaās immigration policy, the federal budget, appointments, ANYTHING to overcome the absence of a scandal thatās actual rather than the desiccated Benghazi and IRS investijokins.
The perception, held throughout the Beltway not just in the GOP, is that thereās significant segment of folks not enthused one way or the other over Bibiās Coming, who nonetheless are open to being animated, or APPEARING to be, over some combination of Israeli defense and free speech. The DNC holds to that view, and the consensus among the ultra centrist spokesfolks in HRCās camp certainly hold to that view (and this is precisely the sort of thing the WH would consult her on).
Itād be ideal for the White House that the public gather the impression of Boehner backing down, even if only because Bibi decides against coming (The issue has been #1 on his list of What To Doās for weeks now.), acceptable if his speaking is followed up by losing his status as Israeli PM out of the coming election, and āgood enoughā if thereās an effective neutering in the media of whatever war cry Bibi puts to Congress.
But just GIVING Bibi some ābroaderā standing, even tho itād be a stupid extension of whatās supposed to be an American freedom for Americans, not foreign pols, would be a disaster.
6 Likes
Huh? The whole idea here is Obama is working towards a grand bargain with Iran, his signature foreign policy legacy, the ex post facto earning of his Nobel peach prize.
Going to Israel in this context is ābowingā to exactly the special status Israel has been granted thatās stood in the way of such a detente.
And WTF would he possibly say to them? Nothing thatād look good or acceptable or that would be spun positively there or here. Talking heads in Congress and at white Fox News and all over msm news will be asking the Dr. Phil question: Wot n hale were you THINK-inā?
Also, if you happened to be interested in sending an American president in the throes of negotiating seriously with Iran over a grand bargain that involves Iran being acknowledged as entitled to a nuclear program of any kind, and at the same time facilitating an assassination attempt on him, at any time between now and the outcome of the Israeli election Israel would be a damn good candidate for the perfect place.
4 Likes
Best way to do that is to seal a deal with Iran before he gets here. And kick some Democratic ass if they go to hear the speech.
8 Likes
I donāt think Bibi should be giving the speech, and I donāt think giving it is likely to help him in the elections. But having said that, Bibiās substantive position is not crazy at all and, in fact, he may be right: Israel has no margin for error. If we pretend that isnāt the case, we will never understand the Israeli position. Those who say that the Israelis could counterattack with their own retaliatory nuclear response really donāt get it: one bomb eliminates Israel and half the worldās Jewish population. And if you say, āOh the Iranians would never do thatā you donāt understand the nuclear blackmail that Iranās possession of the bomb would unleash, not to mention the nuclear arms race between Iran and other Arab states. An acceptable deal is one that doesnāt try to ignore these facts, but deals straight up with them.
No, barring truly extraordinary circumstances (and some pretty unsavory candidates for the Hague have been approved in the past), you canāt deny a visa to a head of state. It would also bring Obama down to the same petty political level as Bibi and Boehner. I do hope the administration plans on a public full-court press based on the Iran policy itself, and keeps up its above-the-fray political rhetoric while continuing to give Netanyahu the respect he deserves by refusing any direct administration attention (and Iām waiting for more Democrats to join them in that effort).
Meanwhile, because until Bibiās given that speech itās not too late:
- I hope everyone, but any Jews here especially, have already contacted their Dem reps about this; the non-Jewish reps need to know theyāve got cover not to attend his speech, because most American Jews emphatically do not stand with Bibi.
- If you havenāt yet, PLEASE call your nearest Israeli consulate and voice your outrage about this political stunt; the last thing Israel needs is to become a partisan issue here. (Those calls are having a real impact back home.) Itās long past time they heard from American Jews who arenāt right-wingers, and realized how much Netanyahu is imperiling support for Israel among Americans in general.
- And finally, if you want an effective counterweight to AIPAC, please look into J Street ā the more support they can show, the greater their influence will be on the Hill, and the sooner we can finally relegate the neocons in both countries to the fringes of our politics where we need them to be, for both our sakes.
These actions really do matter; letās compound the pressure heās already feeling in Israel.
6 Likes
How about getting Aasif Mandvi to stand in for Biden for the visual?
6 Likes
I disagree. Bibiās substantive position is unreasonable if not crazy. His position is that Iran cannot have ANY nuclear CAPABILITY, including a civilian nuclear program, which Iran is permitted to have under the non-proliferation treaty.
So Israel believes it has the right to attack countries who are in compliance with treaties they have refused to sign. Yea, thatās not crazy.
6 Likes
Do it! Do it all!
Ooohhh-I like it!
1 Like
No campaign money for turncoat Democrats!
Israel is not. Attacking - and never has attacked any country that wasnāt a threat to it. Israel has taken out the nuclear capacities of countries that have sworn to destroy it. And the US and many other western countries have quietly cheered Israel doing so.
Please respond to the substantive points in my posting. Thanks!
I think the best move for Obama and the country right now would be for Obama and Iran to finalize a deal before Netanyahu arrives to give his speeches. And as icing on the cake the administration should announce the deal just as Netanyahu arrives in the US. As heās deplaning would be perfect. The major news networks could break in on their coverage of his arrival to announce the deal and Fox could do so too.
2 Likes
I think that the best speaker to represent the Administration at this conference would be the Cheif Custodian at the State Department. The topic would be Trash Disposal.
1 Like
Why are you so convinced that Iran will agree to terms that even Obama would accept? Your comments come across like you think Israel is our enemy and Iran is our ally. Is that right? Would you agree to a deal that let Iran have the capability to build an atomic bomb? Would you agree to a deal that lifted the sanctions and didnāt include totally unfettered access any time any place in Iran for international inspectors. Those who are concerned with what they believe is the outline of a deal believe that the continuation and tightening of the sanctions could get a better deal to assure a non-nuclear threat from Iran. Are they wrong. And if do, why? Iād appreciate a substantive response. Thanks!
Genius!
1 Like