"(1) He didn’t just make a case for why the U.S. should be harder on Iran. He made the case for unilateral Israeli military intervention too, sub silentio."
"(2) The most damaging thing to Obama here isn’t even the substance, but the contrast in style. Netanyahu, as someone said on Twitter, was better in his second language than Obama is in his first. And he presented himself as a leader who cares about his country, rather than one, like Obama, who makes excuses for its enemies."
Via Instapundit
13 comments:
AP: BREAKING: Obama: Israel's Netanyahu 'didn't offer any viable alternatives' in Iran speech to Congress.
He made the case for preventing a nuclear Iran. Dumb ass.
BiBi makes the case, again, why Iran is seeking the existential threat to Israel and the rest of the world in a bold and stark contrast to Urkle utter denial strategy. Urkle goes golfing. Motherfucker.
0bama refuses to name the haed-choppers. who chop heads in the name of Islam and say so.
So now the head-chopper funders, the mad mullahs of Iran, want a big bomb and 0-lozer wants to give it to them. with Pelosi's tears.
What a disgrace.
Here is one of the things I posted on a different blog, in a different part of the world...
Aridog says:
3 March 2015 at 22:40 pm
[Ref: Who knows what the future will bring?]
As you did, I listened to Prime Minister Netanyahu’s speech beginning to end. My opinion is that he is telling us what the future will hold, whether we like it or think it is “realpolitik” or not. If you allow (they already have it but for bits & pieces only, maybe more…) a sectarian nation who stridently believes in the “Mahdi” of Armageddon the means to enact it…they will, certain as sunrise (used to be).
The Prime Minister paid all of the requisite homages, actually more than enough really, to the opposition in his opening remarks, which I note few in the MSM have noted. Then he gave us an opinion that we’d like to ignore or play with like some petulant child insistent on have his/her way.
We saw today what the difference is between a “community organizer” and a “national leader” really is in fact. If we chose to ignore it, we will pay the price. And I suspect we will…glad I’m old so I might not be here for it.
Earlier I had compared our official stance with Iran to that of Europe's with Munich in September 1938 ... a deal to seal a peace. Right. How'd that work out?
Net is this era's Churchill.
Selfie, isn't even Chamberlain (no one ever doubted Neville was trying to protect Dear Old Blighty), more like Petain or Laval.
And the fact Axelrod, Pelosi, Cohen, and the rest of the usual suspects are trying to trash him and what he said makes the speech even more significant.
Did you notice that the Congressional Black Caucus walked out on the speech?
Black Anti-Semitism is one of the things that people are missing about this speech. That is what is really behind Obama's attitude toward Israel. He learned it at Reverend Wright's knee and from his good buddy and principle advisor Al Sharpton.
That's the dirty little secret.
And yet, Jews are mostly Democrats. For the life of me, I can't understand this fact.
AllenS said...
And yet, Jews are mostly Democrats. For the life of me, I can't understand this fact.
March 3, 2015 at 6:36 PM
Marxism is a hell of drug.
How em Barry sing. I didn't notice this post until just right now. Duh.
*kicks own butt*
*steps on own fingers*
*pokes own eyes*
*pulls own hair*
*slaps self*
There. That should punish me sufficiently.
Man, that instapundit is smart. Have you noticed that? He seems less smart on video.
AllenS said...
And yet, Jews are mostly Democrats. For the life of me, I can't understand this fact.
And neither can the Israelis I know.
My term for them is "Jews of Convenience" who remind you that they are "Jewish" only when it suits their argument, as if gives them special credibility (when all else fails in debate with non-Jews)...not that very many have ever risked life in Israel, nor would they.
I've not had one Israeli argue with that description when posted on an Israeli website.
I love how this administration is criticizing the speech as "political". Really? From you guys?
Post a Comment