Eric Cantor to Netanyahu: The GOP Majority Will Be a ‘Check on the Obama Administration’

Politics • Views: 29,480

It was only a few years ago that Republicans were screaming “traitor!” at anyone who tried to undermine the office of the Presidency in such a blatant manner: Rep. Eric Cantor Tells Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu: New GOP Majority Will ‘Serve As A Check On The Administration’.

NEW YORK — Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.) told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Wednesday during a meeting in New York that the new GOP majority in the House will “serve as a check” on the Obama administration, a statement unusual for its blunt disagreement with U.S. policy delivered directly to a foreign leader.

“Eric stressed that the new Republican majority will serve as a check on the Administration and what has been, up until this point, one party rule in Washington,” read a statement from Cantor’s office on the one-on-one meeting. “He made clear that the Republican majority understands the special relationship between Israel and the United States, and that the security of each nation is reliant upon the other.”

Adam Serwer pinpoints Cantor’s amazing hypocrisy; in 2007, Eric Cantor accused Nancy Pelosi of violating the Logan Act (a dusty, seldom-used law that makes it a felony to engage in “unauthorized diplomacy” with foreign countries) when she met with Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad: Eric Cantor And The Logan Act.

Two points; first, Nancy Pelosi did travel to Syria and meet with Assad, and she said some pretty fatuous things (she called him a “man of peace,” which is ludicrous). I criticized her for it at the time, and I still think it was a bad idea. But Pelosi never went as far as Cantor has; she never assured Assad that the Democrats would be on his side against the Bush administration.

Second, I don’t believe Cantor’s bizarre behavior had anything to do with his support for Israel — he was pandering to the angry, delusional elements of the right wing base, who are convinced despite all evidence to the contrary that Obama is anti-Israel. Cantor was reinforcing this utterly false meme, keeping the base fired up, and jockeying for power in the new Tea Party GOP. That was the real reason for his statement.

Jump to bottom

368 comments
1 Tigger2  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 10:55:16am

I beleave that President Cantor has his wires crossed on this over reach.

2 jamesfirecat  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 10:58:14am

Do we have any Israeli (Wow wouldn’t have expected that to be spelled with an “I” at the end) Lizards on at the moment? do you have any insight to offer us on how your people tend to view the two major American parties?

3 Killgore Trout  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:02:58am

re: #2 jamesfirecat

Do we have any Israeli (Wow wouldn’t have expected that to be spelled with an “I” at the end) Lizards on at the moment? do you have any insight to offer us on how your people tend to view the two major American parties?

Israeli politics is complicated. I don’t really understand much about it. There was a brief attempt to start an Israeli Tea Party as an anti Obama movement a month or two ago but it flopped. The hardcore far right settlers tend to not like American involvement no matter who is in the whitehouse. That’s not surprising because they usually don’t care for whoever the Israeli Prime Minister is either.

4 nines09  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:05:17am

Time and again the GOP has done exactly what they were either against or accused others of doing. They truly do act as if there is no other authority but them and those who are not of them are bad for this nation. Maybe Eric Cantor is angling for a guest spot on the Glenn Beck Magical Tent Show and Water Park. //

5 jamesfirecat  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:06:01am

re: #4 nines09

Time and again the GOP has done exactly what they were either against or accused others of doing. They truly do act as if there is no other authority but them and those who are not of them are bad for this nation. Maybe Eric Cantor is angling for a guest spot on the Glenn Beck Magical Tent Show and Water Park. //

Don’t forget the puppet theater!

6 Charles Johnson  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:08:06am

I was not happy with Nancy Pelosi for her trip to Syria either, but what Cantor said here goes way beyond anything Pelosi did. Pelosi didn’t openly subvert the Bush administration like this.

7 nines09  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:08:17am

re: #5 jamesfirecat

He is a douche of epic proportion.

8 abbyadams  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:08:33am

If you play the “switch parties” exercise, and this becomes Pelosi speaking to another foreign leader, I can imagine there would be more than a little outrage. This, IMHO, is disgusting.

9 abbyadams  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:09:13am

re: #8 abbyadams

(Adding, in the same manner.)

10 Charles Johnson  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:11:28am

re: #8 abbyadams

If you play the “switch parties” exercise, and this becomes Pelosi speaking to another foreign leader, I can imagine there would be more than a little outrage. This, IMHO, is disgusting.

Pelosi did speak to Syria’s leader, and said some pretty fatuous things (she called him a “man of peace,” which is ludicrous), but she didn’t assure him that the Democrats would be on his side against the Bush administration.

11 nines09  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:12:55am

re: #6 Charles

Exactly. Subvert is the word. If it was a Democrat, the wheels would be coming off the scream machine.

12 elizajane  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:14:51am

re: #10 Charles

Pelosi did speak to Syria’s leader, and said some pretty fatuous things (she called him a “man of peace,” which is ludicrous), but she didn’t assure him that the Democrats would be on his side against the Bush administration.

Exactly. So why aren’t there Democrats running around shouting “treason”?
1) they don’t want to look petty?
2) they don’t want to stoop to playing the Republicans’ game?
3) they’re too demoralized to object to anything?
4) they’re just not very savvy politicians?

You can only sit on your high horse for so long before the person in the jacked-up pickup truck goes speeding past you. Honking.

13 Firstinla  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:15:10am

This has little to do with either Obama or Israel. This is all about Cantor and his efforts of placing himself within the power structure of his party. It seems all the major players in the Republican party are jostling for significant positions going into the presidential election cycles now that the midterms are over. Cantor’s latest hypocracy will serve him well with the teabaggers. His latest ploy has nothing to do with American ideals.

14 wrenchwench  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:17:12am

The things Cantor said about Pelosi at the time of her visit to Assad should sure be haunting him now. (From the second update at the HuffPo link above.)

Presenting Assad with “a new Democratic alternative” — code for making President Bush look feckless — Mrs. Pelosi usurped the executive branch’s time-honored foreign-policy authority. Her message to Assad was that congressional Democrats will forbid the president from increasing pressure on Damascus to stop its murderous way. Several leading legal authorities have made the case that her recent diplomatic overtures ran afoul of the Logan Act, which makes it a felony for any American “without authority of the United States” to communicate with a foreign government to influence that government’s behavior on any disputes with the United States.
15 SpaceJesus  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:17:44am

The fundie right-wing base only supports Israel because they think doing so will usher in the war, plague, and destruction of revelation and the return of their earth jesus.

16 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:19:04am

re: #3 Killgore Trout

Israeli politics is complicated. I don’t really understand much about it. There was a brief attempt to start an Israeli Tea Party as an anti Obama movement a month or two ago but it flopped. The hardcore far right settlers tend to not like American involvement no matter who is in the whitehouse. That’s not surprising because they usually don’t care for whoever the Israeli Prime Minister is either.

Please remember, also, that there’s a difference between Israelis who are American-born or with strong American ties, and those who aren’t. We tend to hear a lot from the former group because, well, they speak English, but they aren’t necessarily representative in any way of the Israeli public.

17 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:19:32am

re: #8 abbyadams

If you play the “switch parties” exercise, and this becomes Pelosi speaking to another foreign leader, I can imagine there would be more than a little outrage.

Oh, pure hysterics.

18 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:20:07am

re: #12 elizajane

Exactly. So why aren’t there Democrats running around shouting “treason”?
1) they don’t want to look petty?
2) they don’t want to stoop to playing the Republicans’ game?
3) they’re too demoralized to object to anything?
4) they’re just not very savvy politicians?

You can only sit on your high horse for so long before the person in the jacked-up pickup truck goes speeding past you. Honking.

It’s Saturday morning. Maybe the Democrats will start yelling after brunch.

19 First As Tragedy, Then As Farce  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:21:51am

Middle East: Holy shit (literally), we’re still fucked up over here. Attention respected apex superpower: can you help?
POTUS: Well, let me first say that..
Cantor, interrupting: DERPTY DOOP DA TOOPTY TOO
POTUS: Ahem. As I was saying, our policy..
Cantor: WEEE HAGGA BLAGGA RAWWROOORR CHUBBA CHUBBA
Middle East: ah, fuck it. Bombs away

20 Killgore Trout  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:22:33am

re: #16 SanFranciscoZionist

Please remember, also, that there’s a difference between Israelis who are American-born or with strong American ties, and those who aren’t. We tend to hear a lot from the former group because, well, they speak English, but they aren’t necessarily representative in any way of the Israeli public.

Good point.

21 Virginia Plain  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:22:40am

re: #12 elizajane

Exactly. So why aren’t there Democrats running around shouting “treason”?
1) they don’t want to look petty?
2) they don’t want to stoop to playing the Republicans’ game?
3) they’re too demoralized to object to anything?
4) they’re just not very savvy politicians?

You can only sit on your high horse for so long before the person in the jacked-up pickup truck goes speeding past you. Honking.

Because their most appealing quality is sanity. Even during the Bush years, the party did not go off the rails like the GOP has, no matter what certain posters over here will say. The party has some weak ideas, but at least it’s not crazy.

22 First As Tragedy, Then As Farce  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:23:12am

re: #15 SpaceJesus

The fundie right-wing base only supports Israel because they think doing so will usher in the war, plague, and destruction of revelation and the return of their earth jesus.

Lots of people will dismiss this out of hand because it sounds absurd, but it’s undeniably true.

23 jordash1212  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:24:38am

It’s no secret that Netanyahu isn’t a fan of the Obama Administration. I’m not sure what Netanyahu needs at this moment is a politically deadlocked US.

24 jamesfirecat  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:25:12am

re: #21 Virginia Plain

Because their most appealing quality is sanity. Even during the Bush years, the party did not go off the rails like the GOP has, no matter what certain posters over here will say. The party has some weak ideas, but at least it’s not crazy.

///But… but… but… Bill Ayers, Michele Moore, that British Movie where W was killed, ELF, ALF, SOROS….. I’m not the one whose crazy you’re the one whose crazy? Why are you all looking at me like that? I don’t care what you think you’re all a bunch of nuts!

25 bratwurst  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:26:03am

re: #15 SpaceJesus

The fundie right-wing base only supports Israel because they think doing so will usher in the war, plague, and destruction of revelation and the return of their earth jesus.

Not to say that EVERY Republican (here or elsewhere) supports Israel for this reason…but compare the GOP policy toward Israel during the Poppy Bush/James Baker years to today. What has changed? The rise of the religious wing of that party.

26 SpaceJesus  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:30:37am

re: #25 bratwurst

Of course not, that’s why I said the fundie base.

Too bad the evangelical “convert the jews to protestant christianity yee-haw” group of the GOP is fucking huge though…

I remember a thread on here some years ago about Anne Coulter saying that Jews just needed to be “perfected” and I called her an idiot and a bigot, and half the folks around here defended her and dinged me down. gah

27 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:34:56am

re: #26 SpaceJesus

Of course not, that’s why I said the fundie base.

Too bad the evangelical “convert the jews to protestant christianity yee-haw” group of the GOP is fucking huge though…

I remember a thread on here some years ago about Anne Coulter saying that Jews just needed to be “perfected” and I called her an idiot and a bigot, and half the folks around here defended her and dinged me down. gah

We have a better class of lizard these days.

28 nines09  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:36:07am

re: #14 wrenchwench

Why would that have anything to do with reality? The GOP is perfectly willing to deny reality on a daily basis.

29 122 Year Old Obama  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:36:09am

re: #26 SpaceJesus

Of course not, that’s why I said the fundie base.

Too bad the evangelical “convert the jews to protestant christianity yee-haw” group of the GOP is fucking huge though…

I remember a thread on here some years ago about Anne Coulter saying that Jews just needed to be “perfected” and I called her an idiot and a bigot, and half the folks around here defended her and dinged me down. gah

Class of 2004 was a harsh mistress…

30 schnapp  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:36:11am

Charles, OT but are u considering an lgf for android app. I got the samsung galaxy s a few weeks ago ….

31 McSpiff  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:37:16am

re: #30 schnapp

Charles, OT but are u considering an lgf for android app. I got the samsung galaxy s a few weeks ago …

Charles is an Apple guy, so im still holding out hope for an iPhone optimized version of the site ;-)

32 schnapp  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:38:39am

re: #31 McSpiff

I thought he already made an iphone app …

33 Jeff In Ohio  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:42:36am
I would simply hope that people would understand that, under the Constitution, the president conducts foreign policy.
John Bolton, former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations

Pass the bong, I think the Dems need to drop the charade and start calling the clowns clowns.

34 jordash1212  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:42:59am

re: #32 schnapp

No. I think it was a shortcut to the site with a pretty LGF lizard logo.

35 Jeff In Ohio  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:43:44am

re: #30 schnapp

I’d like to be able to embed sound cloud widgets in the pages.

36 jamesfirecat  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:44:44am

re: #33 Jeff In Ohio

Pass the bong, I think the Dems need to drop the charade and start calling the clowns clowns.

I think “find a pair’ describes what the Democrats need to do much better than “drop the charade”

37 First As Tragedy, Then As Farce  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:46:03am

re: #27 SanFranciscoZionist

We have a better class of lizard these days.

Somewhat ironic, given that reptiles predate primates by about 255 million years.

38 HappyWarrior  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:46:18am

Yeah, he’s a hypocrite all right.

39 Firstinla  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:47:02am

I got my first real education in Israeli politics sitting in a coffee shop in Tel Aviv a number of years ago. I asked one of students about the significance of all the small political parties. What followed was one of the most interesting and informative discussions I’ve ever heard. All these young Israeli needed was someone to ask a question and they took it from there. Good coffee, good discussion and I left much more informed than I arrived. Good, good time.

40 Firstinla  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:47:56am

re: #36 jamesfirecat

I think “find a pair’ describes what the Democrats need to do much better than “drop the charade”

Is that the same as “man up”?

41 jordash1212  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:48:14am

re: #39 Firstinla

A lot of people credit the small parties with being the problem in Israeli politics. What reasons did they provide for them being valuable?

42 schnapp  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:48:25am

re: #35 Jeff In Ohio

Either way, trying to write a comment on a touch phone is pretty hard even with the galaxy’s swype tool.

43 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:49:15am

The GOP is betting that their voters have the attention span of a goldfish, apparently.

44 HappyWarrior  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:49:37am

Also agree with Charles that he’s pandering to the part of his base that believes that the Obama administration is anti Israel. I really hope Cantor decides to run for state office here in Va and falls on his face but I imagine he’s pretty happy with his new position.

45 Decatur Deb  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:50:34am

re: #16 SanFranciscoZionist

Please remember, also, that there’s a difference between Israelis who are American-born or with strong American ties, and those who aren’t. We tend to hear a lot from the former group because, well, they speak English, but they aren’t necessarily representative in any way of the Israeli public.

Our office in Israel had an English-capability requirement for the 20 or so Host Nation employees. From among them and our embassy support I’m remembering Israelis from Brooklyn, Canada, Ireland, Scotland, England, Romania, Russia, India, and South Africa. This included a smattering of Sabras, settlers, NRPs, Orthodox, kibbutzniks, and an even wider selection of spouses. The lunchroom arguments were spectacular—the only universal agreement was that trying to impeach a president for a BJ was beyond laughable.

46 Killgore Trout  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:51:50am

OT: I’m attempting to make George Washington Carver’s Sweet Potato flour this afternoon. I don’t know how it’s going to turn out but the house smells fantastic.

47 Firstinla  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:52:43am

re: #41 jordash1212

A lot of people credit the small parties with being the problem in Israeli politics. What reasons did they provide for them being valuable?

I don’t remember anyone using the word “valuable.” I remember some thinking it was important that even the most insignficant parties has some share in the process.

48 jordash1212  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:54:35am

re: #47 Firstinla

Perhaps they then need to change the rules. These factional parties have a disproportionate amount of power.

49 First As Tragedy, Then As Farce  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:55:36am

re: #36 jamesfirecat

I think “find a pair’ describes what the Democrats need to do much better than “drop the charade”

This times eleventy. Buncha gutless wonders. I’m not a Democrat, nor am I necessarily a big fan of Democrats. At the moment, I’m just far more disgusted by the GOP. With the extremely rare exception, Dems seem to have battered wife syndrome, or something. To my probably stupid way of thinking, if they’d put political sharks like James Carville and Bill Clinton at the head of the DNC, with a charismatic guy like Barack Obama in the spotlight, that would be a force to be reckoned with (for better or worse). All I see from the Dems is futile flailing around and just generally seeming willfully impotent.

Meanwhile, the inmates are taking over the asylum…

50 Jeff In Ohio  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:55:42am

re: #42 schnapp

Either way, trying to write a comment on a touch phone is pretty hard even with the galaxy’s swype tool.

I’ve tried on my blackberry. It’s, um, difficult.

51 Firstinla  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:56:43am

re: #48 jordash1212

Perhaps they then need to change the rules. These factional parties have a disproportionate amount of power.

Why? How so?

52 Jeff In Ohio  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:58:04am

re: #36 jamesfirecat

I think “find a pair’ describes what the Democrats need to do much better than “drop the charade”

The charade is that is bi-partisanship in the wings waiting for reason to raise it’s head. Your don’t need any balls when your still asking your dates dad if it’s ok to hold hands.

This mixed metaphor bought to you by Jeff In Ohio™.

53 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:59:54am

re: #49 negativ

I like Weiner.

He’s smart, articulate, and totally unafraid of standing up for what he believes in.

A lot of the problem with the perception of the Democrats as ineffectual is the media. Weiner has delivered a shitton of epic smackdowns to idiotic GOP members, but it’s barely gotten reported on. Pelosi’s congress passed tons of heavy, heavy legislation, but the media makes it sound as though they barely got anything done.

The media has lost any capacity of reporting on what’s actually going on. They have a very simplistic view that the Democrats are being beaten up by the GOP and that’s what they report on, constantly.

54 jamesfirecat  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 12:00:18pm

re: #43 Obdicut

The GOP is betting that their voters have the attention span of a goldfish, apparently.

I’ll take that bet!

55 Gus  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 12:04:31pm

Eric Cantor. Undermining the foreign policy efforts of the executive branch. The saber rattling has already begun not only with these words from Cantor but most recently from South Carolina’s Lindsey Graham. I agree with what others have said. Had such rhetoric been said during the Bush administration it would have fastly been categorized as a form of “patriotic heresy” — you are either with us, or against us. Hysterical cries in reference to the Logan Act would have spread far and wide within the right-wing blogosphere.

56 Merryweather  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 12:06:24pm

re: #43 Obdicut

The GOP is betting that their voters have the attention span of a goldfish, apparently.

This is one bet that’s a 100% guaranteed win.

57 Tigger2  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 12:07:14pm

re: #53 Obdicut

I like Weiner.

He’s smart, articulate, and totally unafraid of standing up for what he believes in.

A lot of the problem with the perception of the Democrats as ineffectual is the media. Weiner has delivered a shitton of epic smackdowns to idiotic GOP members, but it’s barely gotten reported on. Pelosi’s congress passed tons of heavy, heavy legislation, but the media makes it sound as though they barely got anything done.

The media has lost any capacity of reporting on what’s actually going on. They have a very simplistic view that the Democrats are being beaten up by the GOP and that’s what they report on, constantly.

I have to agree with you I have seen several of the Dem Reps smack down the craz

58 First As Tragedy, Then As Farce  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 12:07:20pm

re: #53 Obdicut

I like Weiner.

I almost replied with a joke centered around this sentence, because I am essentially 12 years old forever.

But I didn’t. Sorta.

59 blueraven  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 12:07:49pm

re: #53 Obdicut

I like Weiner.

He’s smart, articulate, and totally unafraid of standing up for what he believes in.

A lot of the problem with the perception of the Democrats as ineffectual is the media. Weiner has delivered a shitton of epic smackdowns to idiotic GOP members, but it’s barely gotten reported on. Pelosi’s congress passed tons of heavy, heavy legislation, but the media makes it sound as though they barely got anything done.

The media has lost any capacity of reporting on what’s actually going on. They have a very simplistic view that the Democrats are being beaten up by the GOP and that’s what they report on, constantly.

Exactly! Last night CNN…”Is the president “caving in” on tax cuts”?
Its called compromise folks. Isn’t that what everyone pretends to want? Except for the tea party anyway.

Thank you Charles for posting about Cantor and the hypocrisy. I was reading about this yesterday and had to pick my jaw up off the table. Just amazing!

60 jordash1212  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 12:07:49pm

re: #51 Firstinla

In the case of the Netanyahu government he needs the support of the small political parties in order to form a coalition. Just look at the makeup of Netanyahu’s cabinet and the Knesset. The small, conservative, and religious groups will not bend on issues like Israeli security or halting settlements.

I believe Netanyahu is serious about making peace with the Palestinians, but he’s hamstrung by his coalition. If he surpasses the threshold of what the Israeli religious right deems acceptable, they will dissolve the coalition.

61 Merryweather  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 12:08:46pm

The GOP and right-wing in general are operating on the basis that whatever they hated people on the left doing to a Republican president, they’ll now do to a Democratic president in retaliation. It’s pathetic.

62 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 12:10:22pm

re: #61 Merryweather

And they’re mixing up what the ‘left’ actually did, and what the right-wing nutjobs just claimed that they did.

63 Tigger2  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 12:11:57pm

re: #53 Obdicut

I like Weiner.

He’s smart, articulate, and totally unafraid of standing up for what he believes in.

A lot of the problem with the perception of the Democrats as ineffectual is the media. Weiner has delivered a shitton of epic smackdowns to idiotic GOP members, but it’s barely gotten reported on. Pelosi’s congress passed tons of heavy, heavy legislation, but the media makes it sound as though they barely got anything done.

The media has lost any capacity of reporting on what’s actually going on. They have a very simplistic view that the Democrats are being beaten up by the GOP and that’s what they report on, constantly.

Don’t know why that posted didn’t finish,

I have seen many Deem Reps smack down the crazy ideas and rhetoric that has been thrown out there but it never goes any farther than MSNBC.
A very bad breakdown of the MSN.

64 Gus  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 12:16:09pm

TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 45 > § 953
§ 953. Private correspondence with foreign governments

Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

This section shall not abridge the right of a citizen to apply, himself or his agent, to any foreign government or the agents thereof for redress of any injury which he may have sustained from such government or any of its agents or subjects.

65 Firstinla  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 12:16:40pm

re: #60 jordash1212

All good points and well said. Thanks. One of the reasons I like this blog is because it helps me better understand.

66 Merryweather  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 12:17:49pm

re: #62 Obdicut

And they’re mixing up what the ‘left’ actually did, and what the right-wing nutjobs just claimed that they did.

I remember how outraged the right wing was over the Dixie Chicks for far less than this. Boycotts, accusations of treason, the whole nine yards. For saying they were ashamed Bush came from Texas while overseas.

67 Varek Raith  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 12:20:21pm

re: #66 Merryweather

I remember how outraged the right wing was over the Dixie Chicks for far less than this. Boycotts, accusations of treason, the whole nine yards. For saying they were ashamed Bush came from Texas while overseas.

I’m ashamed that Texas is part of the US.
/Says from the comfort of his chair.
//

68 Merryweather  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 12:23:39pm

re: #53 Obdicut

I like Weiner.

He’s smart, articulate, and totally unafraid of standing up for what he believes in.

A lot of the problem with the perception of the Democrats as ineffectual is the media. Weiner has delivered a shitton of epic smackdowns to idiotic GOP members, but it’s barely gotten reported on. Pelosi’s congress passed tons of heavy, heavy legislation, but the media makes it sound as though they barely got anything done.

The media has lost any capacity of reporting on what’s actually going on. They have a very simplistic view that the Democrats are being beaten up by the GOP and that’s what they report on, constantly.

Weiner is one of the best Dems in the House. He knows how to fight the good fight without being obnoxious a la Grayson.

69 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 12:31:56pm

re: #68 Merryweather

Yes. He also pressures Obama on Israel; Cantor is one of the staunchest supporters of Israel on the House floor.

So Cantor’s whole ‘one party rule’ bullshit is also bullshit. Not only is Obama holding the same positions on Israel as Bush did, but Democrats like Weiner are staunch advocates of Israel.

There are definitely anti-Israel Democrats. They in no way make the majority of the Democrats.

Youtube Video
nysun.com

70 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 12:32:27pm

re: #69 Obdicut

Yes. He also pressures Obama on Israel; Cantor Weiner is one of the staunchest supporters of Israel on the House floor.

PIMF

71 Varek Raith  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 12:33:42pm

So, Erik, what is Obama doing the you don’t like?
It’s the same freaking policy as the last…crapload of administrations…

72 recusancy  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 12:35:58pm

Also, here’s some context on Pelosi’s trip.

73 Charles Johnson  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 12:47:42pm

Speaking of the angry delusional right wing base, one of my admirers on Twitter:

Little Green Crap balls Charles Johnson is flirting with antisemitic trope of dual loyalty on Eric Cantor

74 Cheese Eating Victory Monkey  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 12:51:34pm

re: #2 jamesfirecat

…do you have any insight to offer us on how your people tend to view the two major American parties?

From what I see, Israelis don’t care about American domestic politics. They care about Israeli politics and having good relations with America, regardless of who’s in the White House.

75 TedStriker  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 12:54:50pm

re: #73 Charles

Speaking of the angry delusional right wing base, one of my admirers on Twitter:

Little Green Crap balls Charles Johnson is flirting with antisemitic trope of dual loyalty on Eric Cantor

Wingnut knuckledragger sez whut?

76 Bob Dillon  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 12:56:22pm

Probably the only honest person in DC:

From The Hunt for Red October:

Jeffrey Pelt: Listen, I’m a politician which means I’m a cheat and a liar, and when I’m not kissing babies I’m stealing their lollipops. But it also means I keep my options open.

77 albusteve  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 12:56:22pm

so Eric the Red squeaked through the door to make a fuss…what exactly is his plan to undermine the POTUS?….talk is cheap, especially inside the Beltway

78 Gus  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 12:57:23pm

re: #75 talon_262

Wingnut knuckledragger sez whut?

I’m still trying to figure out the “dual loyalty” part.

79 Merryweather  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:00:50pm

re: #73 Charles

Speaking of the angry delusional right wing base, one of my admirers on Twitter:

Little Green Crap balls Charles Johnson is flirting with antisemitic trope of dual loyalty on Eric Cantor

Oh brother. If a Republican were to suggest ceding American sovereignty to Israel, and someone called them out, these loons would ignore the treason and just slam the critic for hating Israel.

It’s entirely possible to be a strong supporter of Israel without approving of all the actions taken by pro-Israel politicians.

80 First As Tragedy, Then As Farce  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:03:19pm

Let’s redeem Texas by ~1%

Eric Johnson, King of Austin

Youtube Video

81 Merryweather  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:04:15pm

re: #78 Gus 802

Wingnut knuckledragger sez whut?

I’m still trying to figure out the “dual loyalty” part.

I think it means the suggestion that a strong supporter of Israel puts Israel above the US. I used to see that get thrown around a lot about Jeffrey Goldberg because he served in the IDF. That is a genuinely anti-Israel belief.

82 TedStriker  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:04:53pm

re: #78 Gus 802

Wingnut knuckledragger sez whut?

I’m still trying to figure out the “dual loyalty” part.

My analytical functions went cold on that one too, but I think they’re trying to insinuate Charles is accusing Cantor of putting a supposed allegiance to Israel over his allegiance to America over this backdoor diplomacy with Bibi.

83 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:08:35pm

re: #78 Gus 802

Wingnut knuckledragger sez whut?

I’m still trying to figure out the “dual loyalty” part.

Criticizing Cantor for undercutting the administration with Bibi means that Charles is accusing him of holding loyalties to Israel, because he is a Jew.

//I speak wingnut.

84 Charleston Chew  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:08:58pm

re: #53 Obdicut

The media has lost any capacity of reporting on what’s actually going on. They have a very simplistic view that the Democrats are being beaten up by the GOP and that’s what they report on, constantly.

But ironically the fact that the GOP has successfully created and controlled that perception means that in fact the Democrats are being beaten up on, not in the Congress but in the realm of public perception.

85 Gus  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:11:27pm

re: #83 SanFranciscoZionist

Criticizing Cantor for undercutting the administration with Bibi means that Charles is accusing him of holding loyalties to Israel, because he is a Jew.

//I speak wingnut.

Ah. Here I thought that Eric Cantor was just a representative representing the 7th District of Virginia. And the last time I checked the American people didn’t vote for Cantor to represent the USA with Israel.

86 Gus  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:15:10pm

re: #85 Gus 802

Ah. Here I thought that Eric Cantor was just a representative representing the 7th District of Virginia. And the last time I checked the American people didn’t vote for Cantor to represent the USA with Israel.

Here’s a map of where Cantor was elected to represent:

Image: VA-7th_District-109.gif

That’s all he represents. He doesn’t represent the USA in diplomatic matters. If he wants to do that he should run for national office. Otherwise, he should stick to what matters to his district which doesn’t include usurping the authority of the White House and the State Department.

87 nines09  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:15:27pm

re: #64 Gus 802
Does this mean that my invitation to Kim Jong il to swim in the deepest part of my pool,free of government intervention, is suspect?//

88 Charleston Chew  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:15:42pm

re: #84 Charleston Chew

I guess what I mean is that I’m tired of Dem politicians saying something like, “We’re actually really successful at politics, but a majority of people just don’t know about it or believe it.”

Can you spot the paradox?

89 jordash1212  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:16:13pm

re: #65 Firstinla

Indeed, lots of smart cookies lurking around here. Threads like this one are good too. The less people talking about lots of different things, the more constructive the threads are.

90 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:17:22pm

re: #87 nines09

Does this mean that my invitation to Kim Jong il to swim in the deepest part of my pool,free of government intervention, is suspect?//

I am currently recovering from a bit of a cold, and really could have done without the image of Lil’ Kim in a bathing suit. Ya know?

91 Gus  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:18:03pm

re: #90 SanFranciscoZionist

I am currently recovering from a bit of a cold, and really could have done without the image of Lil’ Kim in a bathing suit. Ya know?

In Speedos ©

//

92 Charles Johnson  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:18:23pm

re: #82 talon_262

My analytical functions went cold on that one too, but I think they’re trying to insinuate Charles is accusing Cantor of putting a supposed allegiance to Israel over his allegiance to America over this backdoor diplomacy with Bibi.

The nice people who follow my every word are always trying to pin antisemitism on me — they think if they can “get” me on that one it will be the final straw that destroys my will to live, once and for all.

93 nines09  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:19:21pm

re: #90 SanFranciscoZionist

Diving board.

94 BryanS  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:19:59pm

re: #10 Charles

Pelosi did speak to Syria’s leader, and said some pretty fatuous things (she called him a “man of peace,” which is ludicrous), but she didn’t assure him that the Democrats would be on his side against the Bush administration.

As well she shouldn’t have. Syria is not exactly an ally like Israel is. Doesn’t that make a difference to you?

As you pointed out, Pelosi’s statements were more fatuous than affecting on any real policy. But that was her point going there—by comparison, what of Obama’s policies towards Israel exactly was Cantor countermanding? Obama hasn’t made any policy statement that the US was abandoning its relationship with Israel.

95 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:20:46pm

re: #92 Charles

The nice people who follow my every word are always trying to pin antisemitism on me — they think if they can “get” me on that one it will be the final straw that destroys my will to live, once and for all.

Yes, they’re very happy at the moment. They’re hopeful that the break with Israel that they’ve been predicting for several years is now imminent.

96 albusteve  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:24:29pm

re: #94 BryanS

As well she shouldn’t have. Syria is not exactly an ally like Israel is. Doesn’t that make a difference to you?

As you pointed out, Pelosi’s statements were more fatuous than affecting on any real policy. But that was her point going there—by comparison, what of Obama’s policies towards Israel exactly was Cantor countermanding? Obama hasn’t made any policy statement that the US was abandoning its relationship with Israel.

it’s all yet to happen…I think BO can hold his own with regard to any upstart Rep…BO’s problem with Israel is his fixation on the settlements, and the continuing notion of Pali appeasement

97 Charles Johnson  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:25:17pm

re: #94 BryanS

As well she shouldn’t have. Syria is not exactly an ally like Israel is. Doesn’t that make a difference to you?

I’d say no, it doesn’t make a difference. Openly saying you’re going to support a foreign power when their policies conflict with official US policy, for partisan reasons, sucks. Not to put too fine a point on it. Ally or not.

As you pointed out, Pelosi’s statements were more fatuous than affecting on any real policy. But that was her point going there—by comparison, what of Obama’s policies towards Israel exactly was Cantor countermanding? Obama hasn’t made any policy statement that the US was abandoning its relationship with Israel.

I thought that was the entire point of what I wrote. This really had nothing to do with support for Israel - it’s just simple pandering to the loony base.

98 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:26:33pm

re: #96 albusteve

it’s all yet to happen…I think BO can hold his own with regard to any upstart Rep…BO’s problem with Israel is his fixation on the settlements, and the continuing notion of Pali appeasement

Does he differ in these points in any quantifiable way from previous presidents?

99 Cheese Eating Victory Monkey  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:27:46pm

The point of all this is that while the GOP can fight Obama tooth and nail over domestic issues, it is inappropriate for the opposition party to intervene on foreign policy, whether it’s in Israel and the settlement issue or last year’s Iranian civilian uprising. Looking at it in the reverse situation, it would be inappropriate of Israeli opposition leader Tzipi Livni to promise Obama that she’s going to “check” the Netanyahu government. Indeed, politics ending at the waters edge was a good rule that should be adhered to for proper governing.

I’m dissapointed with Cantor for another reason - whether he realizes it or not, he’s a prominent Jewish politician (even if the vast majority of Jews don’t vote for him or his party), and the sad state of affairs is that anti-semites are waiting to pounce on ill-thought out statements such as these as “proof” of paranoid “Jewish conspiracies”. All it takes to see this in action is to take a dip in the HuffPo comment sewer of that article.

Finally, the fears of some Jews and involvement in politics is not a new issue. I recall that back in the 2000 elections there were Jewish retirees in Florida who refused to vote for the Gore/Lieberman ticket out of fear that a Jew would reach the highest office and become a lightening rod for antisemitism. Cantor, with his ignorance and/or political ambition, is not making things easier, to put things gently.

100 albusteve  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:28:32pm

re: #98 SanFranciscoZionist

Does he differ in these points in any quantifiable way from previous presidents?

no, they have all been wrong, so BO is pretty ordinary there…Lawhawk has written some very good stuff about it

101 BryanS  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:29:38pm

re: #97 Charles

I’d say no, it doesn’t make a difference. Openly saying you’re going to support a foreign power when their policies conflict with official US policy, for partisan reasons, sucks. Not to put too fine a point on it. Ally or not.

I thought that was the entire point of what I wrote. This really had nothing to do with support for Israel - it’s just simple pandering to the loony base.

Agreed on the second half then, and I think that is more the point of what Cantor was doing. He was pandering. All Cantor really was saying was the Repubs would be better allies. I didn’t see anything in the statement claiming Cantor would “side with Israel”.

102 BryanS  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:30:53pm

re: #98 SanFranciscoZionist

Does he differ in these points in any quantifiable way from previous presidents?

He doesn’t really, maybe a bit in tone but that is all.

103 Killgore Trout  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:30:54pm

re: #99 Cheese Eating Victory Monkey

I’m dissapointed with Cantor for another reason - whether he realizes it or not, he’s a prominent Jewish politician (even if the vast majority of Jews don’t vote for him or his party), and the sad state of affairs is that anti-semites are waiting to pounce on ill-thought out statements such as these as “proof” of paranoid “Jewish conspiracies”. All it takes to see this in action is to take a dip in the HuffPo comment sewer of that article.

That’s a very good point. Stormfront Nazis and the Paulians both noticed that as well.

104 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:31:50pm

re: #99 Cheese Eating Victory Monkey

The point of all this is that while the GOP can fight Obama tooth and nail over domestic issues, it is inappropriate for the opposition party to intervene on foreign policy, whether it’s in Israel and the settlement issue or last year’s Iranian civilian uprising.

As Cantor hismself reminded Pelosi when she met with Syrian leaders. That’s the most bafflingly bizarre part of this. Cantor criticized Pelosi for a much more minor breach.

Congress has any number of ways of expressing their opinion on the president’s foreign policies without going to foreign leaders to do so.

105 albusteve  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:32:20pm

re: #101 BryanS

Agreed on the second half then, and I think that is more the point of what Cantor was doing. He was pandering. All Cantor really was saying was the Repubs would be better allies. I didn’t see anything in the statement claiming Cantor would “side with Israel”.

I didn’t either….Cantor is just carving out a expanded role for himself, which of course, panders to his base…Eric is moving up along with his chances for getting rebuked

106 Charles Johnson  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:34:08pm

re: #101 BryanS

All Cantor really was saying was the Repubs would be better allies. I didn’t see anything in the statement claiming Cantor would “side with Israel”.

He said the GOP would “serve as a check” on the Obama administration. In other words, oppose the administration’s policies. I don’t see any other way to interpret that without tying yourself into a pretzel.

107 122 Year Old Obama  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:34:36pm

re: #104 Obdicut

Of course. When “the enemy” does it, it’s treasonous and must be stopped at all costs. When they do it, it’s A-OK because they’re just doing their part to fight their illusionary socialist/communist/terrorist/satanist/muslim dictator boogiemen.

108 _remembertonyc  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:36:24pm

I don’t think Cantor is pandering to the tea party people. I think
this has more to do with trying to show Jewish voters that the GOP is more solidly supportive of Israel than the Dems are.

Cantor is the highest profile Jewish member of the GOP in DC, and he may be trying to peel off some Jewish votes that could make the difference in the 2012 election for President.

109 BryanS  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:38:07pm

re: #106 Charles

He said the GOP would “serve as a check” on the Obama administration. In other words, oppose the administration’s policies. I don’t see any other way to interpret that without tying yourself into a pretzel.

Serving as a check is a far cry from siding with a foreign power in my mind. In the context of the US government, minority parties serve as a check against the president or leadership of either house. That doesn’t mean they are siding against the interests of the American people.

110 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:38:15pm

re: #108 _remembertonyc

I don’t think Cantor is pandering to the tea party people. I think
this has more to do with trying to show Jewish voters that the GOP is more solidly supportive of Israel than the Dems are.

But how is he doing that? Obama’s positions on Israel are basically identical to Bush’s positions. So in saying that the GOP will be a ‘check’ on Obama— on what, exactly? What are they going to ‘check’?

111 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:39:14pm

re: #109 BryanS

Same question. A check against what actions or policies of Obama, exactly? What is it that Obama has done, re Israel, that is different than Bush and needs checking?

112 BryanS  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:39:38pm

re: #108 _remembertonyc

I don’t think Cantor is pandering to the tea party people. I think
this has more to do with trying to show Jewish voters that the GOP is more solidly supportive of Israel than the Dems are.

Cantor is the highest profile Jewish member of the GOP in DC, and he may be trying to peel off some Jewish votes that could make the difference in the 2012 election for President.

That’s what it looks like to me.

113 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:39:45pm

re: #108 _remembertonyc

If that were the case, then I’d say it’s pretty much wishful thinking on his part. Considering the tack the GOP has taken over the last couple of years, I doubt that there will many Jewish voters pulling the (R) lever in the future.

114 BryanS  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:41:07pm

re: #111 Obdicut

Same question. A check against what actions or policies of Obama, exactly? What is it that Obama has done, re Israel, that is different than Bush and needs checking?

I asked the same question further upthread…if you have answers, please fill in.

115 albusteve  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:41:14pm

re: #110 Obdicut

But how is he doing that? Obama’s positions on Israel are basically identical to Bush’s positions. So in saying that the GOP will be a ‘check’ on Obama— on what, exactly? What are they going to ‘check’?

maybe to check the ongoing policy of resisting construction on the West bank, which I, for one, consider Israeli sovereign territory

116 Cheese Eating Victory Monkey  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:44:09pm

re: #110 Obdicut

Obama’s positions on Israel are basically identical to Bush’s positions.

I agree, and Clinton sounds an awful lot like Condi.

117 Charles Johnson  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:45:04pm

re: #109 BryanS

Serving as a check is a far cry from siding with a foreign power in my mind. In the context of the US government, minority parties serve as a check against the president or leadership of either house. That doesn’t mean they are siding against the interests of the American people.

But come on! Checks and balances in internal US politics are another matter entirely.

This is in the context of a statement Cantor made to the prime minister of Israel. There wouldn’t be much point in saying this to the PM of Israel if he didn’t intend it to be taken as supporting Israel against the Obama admin.

118 blueraven  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:45:09pm

re: #88 Charleston Chew

I guess what I mean is that I’m tired of Dem politicians saying something like, “We’re actually really successful at politics, but a majority of people just don’t know about it or believe it.”

Can you spot the paradox?

I think they are saying “”We’re actually really successful at governing, but a majority of people just don’t know about it or believe it.”

The republicans are much better at politics and messaging.

119 _remembertonyc  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:45:16pm

re: #110 Obdicut

But how is he doing that? Obama’s positions on Israel are basically identical to Bush’s positions. So in saying that the GOP will be a ‘check’ on Obama— on what, exactly? What are they going to ‘check’?

Most Jews automatically vote Democrat for any number of reasons. But there are a significant number of Jews who are concerned about how Obama sees things in the Mideast. I happen to be one of them. So for those Jews who consider Israel to be endangered by Obama’s policies in the Mideast, Cantor is offering hope for better treatment of Israel due to the influence the GOP might have on our policies regarding the Jewish state.

120 BryanS  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:45:16pm

re: #115 albusteve

maybe to check the ongoing policy of resisting construction on the West bank, which I, for one, consider Israeli sovereign territory

Bush pushed back a bit on that as well—though perhaps to a lesser extent. Every US president has gone back to this position when trying to get the Palestinians and Israelis to negotiate.

121 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:45:17pm

re: #110 Obdicut

What are they going to ‘check’?

The Mysterious, Holy Grail Nirth Certifikate.

122 TedStriker  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:45:49pm

re: #109 BryanS

Serving as a check is a far cry from siding with a foreign power in my mind. In the context of the US government, minority parties serve as a check against the president or leadership of either house. That doesn’t mean they are siding against the interests of the American people.

What part of this do you not understand?

“Eric stressed that the new Republican majority will serve as a check on the Administration and what has been, up until this point, one party rule in Washington,” read a statement from Cantor’s office on the one-on-one meeting. “He made clear that the Republican majority understands the special relationship between Israel and the United States, and that the security of each nation is reliant upon the other.”

As Obdi has said, the Obama administration, by and large, has continued the Bush administration’s policy on Israel, so what is there to “check”. It seems to me that Cantor is saying that only the GOP “understands” Israel (inferring the Dems are clueless at best, belligerent at worst)…the only thing wingnut TPers want from Israel is the Rapture, not a more secure Israel.

123 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:46:28pm

re: #111 Obdicut

Same question. A check against what actions or policies of Obama, exactly? What is it that Obama has done, re Israel, that is different than Bush and needs checking?

Trying to freeze settlement expansion—wait, Bush did that.

Promoting peace talks—wait, Bush did that…

124 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:46:29pm

re: #114 BryanS

I asked the same question further upthread…if you have answers, please fill in.

I’m pointing out that, without that, what Cantor is saying doesn’t make any sense. Saying he’s going to ‘check’ Obama implies Obama is doing something that needs checking.

So I don’t think that you saying that Cantor is just expressing that the opposition party ‘checks’ the president makes any sense. Cantor is perpetuating the false meme that Obama is different on Israel from Bush.

125 No Country For Old Haters  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:47:41pm

re: #119 _remembertonyc

Most Jews automatically vote Democrat for any number of reasons. But there are a significant number of Jews who are concerned about how Obama sees things in the Mideast. I happen to be one of them. So for those Jews who consider Israel to be endangered by Obama’s policies in the Mideast, Cantor is offering hope for better treatment of Israel due to the influence the GOP might have on our policies regarding the Jewish state.

He’s playing on the fears of paranoids. Being one of them is nothing to be proud of.

126 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:47:51pm

re: #123 SanFranciscoZionist

BUSH’S THRID TERM!!11ty
///

127 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:48:02pm

re: #119 _remembertonyc

Most Jews automatically vote Democrat for any number of reasons.

I’d say they don’t automatically do it, because they’re doing it for reasons.

But there are a significant number of Jews who are concerned about how Obama sees things in the Mideast. I happen to be one of them.

But Obama’s policies and positions are identical to Bush’s. So what, exactly, concerns you?

So for those Jews who consider Israel to be endangered by Obama’s policies in the Mideast, Cantor is offering hope for better treatment of Israel due to the influence the GOP might have on our policies regarding the Jewish state.

How does he offer that hope? Obama treats Israel as Bush did. If Cantor didn’t use his influence to get Israel better treatment when his party held total control, why would he do it now?

128 _remembertonyc  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:48:29pm

re: #123 SanFranciscoZionist

Trying to freeze settlement expansion—wait, Bush did that.

Promoting peace talks—wait, Bush did that…

I may be wrong, but did previous administrations bust Israel’s balls about building housing in Jerusalem the way Obama has?

129 wrenchwench  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:48:59pm

re: #108 _remembertonyc

I don’t think Cantor is pandering to the tea party people. I think
this has more to do with trying to show Jewish voters that the GOP is more solidly supportive of Israel than the Dems are.

Cantor is the highest profile Jewish member of the GOP in DC, and he may be trying to peel off some Jewish votes that could make the difference in the 2012 election for President.

The really nefarious part is where he implies that the “special relationship” Israel has with the US is actually a “special relationship” with the Republicans. His office said, “He made clear that the Republican majority understands the special relationship between Israel and the United States…” with the clear implication that Democrats do not. Foreign policy should not be a competition between the parties.

130 researchok  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:49:00pm

re: #117 Charles

But come on! Checks and balances in internal US politics are another matter entirely.

This is in the context of a statement Cantor made to the prime minister of Israel. There wouldn’t be much point in saying this to the PM of Israel if he didn’t intend it to be taken as supporting Israel against the Obama admin.

That’s the part that gets lost.

Cantor is trying to create the impression that somehow, GOP support of Israel will be different.

It isn’t about Israel, it is about Obama- and encouraging the perception that Obama is somehow soft on Israel.

Political smoke and mirrors.

Plus ca change, plus ca reste la meme.

Enjoy the theater.

131 _remembertonyc  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:49:06pm

re: #125 JeffFX

He’s playing on the fears of paranoids. Being one of them is nothing to be proud of.

Excuse me?

132 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:49:55pm

re: #128 _remembertonyc

I may be wrong, but did previous administrations bust Israel’s balls about building housing in Jerusalem the way Obama has?

Yep.

news.bbc.co.uk

133 researchok  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:50:12pm

re: #129 wrenchwench

The really nefarious part is where he implies that the “special relationship” Israel has with the US is actually a “special relationship” with the Republicans. His office said, “He made clear that the Republican majority understands the special relationship between Israel and the United States…” with the clear implication that Democrats do not. Foreign policy should not be a competition between the parties.

This game predates Obama. It is all rather predictable.

134 _remembertonyc  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:50:15pm

re: #129 wrenchwench

The really nefarious part is where he implies that the “special relationship” Israel has with the US is actually a “special relationship” with the Republicans. His office said, “He made clear that the Republican majority understands the special relationship between Israel and the United States…” with the clear implication that Democrats do not. Foreign policy should not be a competition between the parties.

Sadly, everything these days is political.

135 BryanS  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:50:33pm

re: #117 Charles

But come on! Checks and balances in internal US politics are another matter entirely.

This is in the context of a statement Cantor made to the prime minister of Israel. There wouldn’t be much point in saying this to the PM of Israel if he didn’t intend it to be taken as supporting Israel against the Obama admin.

Of course it was meant to say that Cantor/Repubs would “check” foreign policy of the Obama admin. I still don’t think that’s not the same as “side with”. There’s more to politics than “with us or against us”. Just like Obama is not “against” Israel when he makes settlements and issue in order to try to set up negotiations.

136 insanity police  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:51:08pm

Obama has done some good things.

Nonetheless, I think Obama has been horrible on the issue of Israel. The only good thing about the Republicans coming into power is that they will be a check on Obama’s bad foreign policy.

Just my opinion.

137 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:51:45pm

re: #128 _remembertonyc

I may be wrong, but did previous administrations bust Israel’s balls about building housing in Jerusalem the way Obama has?

The Bush administration joined the Palestinians in criticizing the earlier housing plans. On Tuesday, White House Press Secretary Dana Perino said she was not familiar with the new plans, “but, obviously, there’s no doubt that an announcement of that sort would make the Palestinians concerned.”

Whether this is as bad as saying you’re ‘deeply disappointed’ is one of those things that can be argued, but the Bush Administration did try for settlement freeze, even in East Jerusalem, all along.

138 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:51:51pm

re: #129 wrenchwench

His office said, “He made clear that the Republican majority understands the special relationship between Israel and the United States…” with the clear implication that Democrats do not.

Wait, does he mean to imply that the Dems do not see Israel as their religious, dooms day clock?
/

139 No Country For Old Haters  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:52:02pm

re: #131 _remembertonyc

Excuse me?

The Republicans have nothing to offer, so they do everything they can to mislead people, and exploit their fears. Don’t fall for it.

140 Charles Johnson  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:52:48pm

George H. W. Bush called East Jerusalem “occupied territory:”

articles.chicagotribune.com

141 BryanS  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:53:11pm

re: #122 talon_262

What part of this do you not understand?

As Obdi has said, the Obama administration, by and large, has continued the Bush administration’s policy on Israel, so what is there to “check”. It seems to me that Cantor is saying that only the GOP “understands” Israel (inferring the Dems are clueless at best, belligerent at worst)…the only thing wingnut TPers want from Israel is the Rapture, not a more secure Israel.

I don’t disagree with anything you’ve just said. In fact, you seem to be making my point that I’ve made upthread—this was just pandering, and not a statement of “siding with Israel” .

142 _remembertonyc  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:53:19pm

re: #139 JeffFX

The Republicans have nothing to offer, so they do everything they can to mislead people, and exploit their fears. Don’t fall for it.

I can think for myself … Thanks.

143 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:53:37pm

re: #134 _remembertonyc

Sadly, everything these days is political.

As it ever was, as it ever shall be. Second oldest profession, and all that.

144 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:54:05pm

re: #140 Charles

George W. Bush called East Jerusalem “occupied territory:”

[Link: articles.chicagotribune.com…]

Wasn’t that HW?

145 BryanS  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:54:24pm

re: #124 Obdicut

I’m pointing out that, without that, what Cantor is saying doesn’t make any sense. Saying he’s going to ‘check’ Obama implies Obama is doing something that needs checking.

So I don’t think that you saying that Cantor is just expressing that the opposition party ‘checks’ the president makes any sense. Cantor is perpetuating the false meme that Obama is different on Israel from Bush.

read talon_262’s comment #122

146 _remembertonyc  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:56:02pm

Thanks to SFZ, Obdi, and Charles for those links that answered my question about previous administrations feelings about East Jerusalem.

I feel pretty hopeless about real peace ever coming to pass for Israel. It has tried hard, but they can’t make peace alone.

147 researchok  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:56:32pm

Obama is ‘shaking things up’.

Nothing wrong with that- and plenty good with it.

America is not going to side with some of the mist dysfunctional and failed states in modern history, nor will ever partner up with those for calls to genocide are political and religious obligations.

I believe Obama is being a pragmatist. He, like most of us, understands that there will be no real regional political change in the future. He rightly says’ Make peace, increase trade’. The Israelis will have to [ut up with state sanctioned racism and bigotry for a while longer, one way of the other.

Trade has made a lot of ugliness go away.

People would rather trade than fight.

148 No Country For Old Haters  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:56:51pm

re: #142 _remembertonyc

I can think for myself … Thanks.

Sorry, but it seemed like you were supporting the Republican illusion that they protect Israel from Obama, which of course is absurd. Perhaps I was mistaken.

149 goddamnedfrank  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:56:57pm

re: #129 wrenchwench

The really nefarious part is where he implies that the “special relationship” Israel has with the US is actually a “special relationship” with the Republicans. His office said, “He made clear that the Republican majority understands the special relationship between Israel and the United States…” with the clear implication that Democrats do not. Foreign policy should not be a competition between the parties.

Cantor is overcompensating because he’s embarrassed by his own party. He knows that the GOP base is largely comprised of two faced dominionist pud whacks who like to talk about how much they support Israel in public, but enjoy using terms like “getting Jewed” in private. One reason that American Jews tend to vote Democratic it’s because they have clued in on this discrepancy and understand the motive is apocalyptic fundamentalism.

150 bratwurst  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:57:43pm

re: #136 insanity police

Obama has done some good things.

Nonetheless, I think Obama has been horrible on the issue of Israel. The only good thing about the Republicans coming into power is that they will be a check on Obama’s bad foreign policy.

Just my opinion.

How much evidence do you need that the Obama policy toward Israel has not been very different than that of any previous administration?

151 Charles Johnson  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:58:15pm

re: #144 SanFranciscoZionist

Wasn’t that HW?

Yeah, I corrected the comment, but you saw it before my edit. Quick on that button.

152 albusteve  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:59:12pm

re: #150 bratwurst

How much evidence do you need that the Obama policy toward Israel has not been very different than that of any previous administration?

I don’t recall anyone questioning that….but then so what?…it’s not about Bush

153 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:59:44pm

re: #145 BryanS

read talon_262’s comment #122

Er, I think you were supposed to read it, actually. Since that comment agrees with me and asks you what you don’t understand about Cantor’s statement.

154 TedStriker  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 1:59:51pm

re: #149 goddamnedfrank

Cantor is overcompensating because he’s embarrassed by his own party. He knows that the GOP base is largely comprised of two faced dominionist pud whacks who like to talk about how much they support Israel in public, but enjoy using terms like “getting Jewed” in private. One reason that American Jews tend to vote Democratic it’s because they have clued in on this discrepancy and understand the motive is apocalyptic fundamentalism.

DING DING DING

155 Slumbering Behemoth Stinks  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:00:06pm

OT: Christian woman sentenced to death in Pakistan ‘for blasphemy’

A Christian woman has been sentenced to hang in Pakistan after being convicted of defaming the Prophet Mohammed.

Asia Bibi, a 45-year-old mother-of-five, denies blasphemy and told investigators that she was being persecuted for her faith in a country where Christians face routine harassment and discrimination.

Christian groups and human rights campaigners condemned the verdict and called for the blasphemy laws to be repealed.

Her supporters say she will now appeal against the sentence handed down in a local court in the town of Sheikhupura, near Lahore, Pakistan.

156 BryanS  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:00:27pm

re: #149 goddamnedfrank

Cantor is overcompensating because he’s embarrassed by his own party. He knows that the GOP base is largely comprised of two faced dominionist pud whacks who like to talk about how much they support Israel in public, but enjoy using terms like “getting Jewed” in private. One reason that American Jews tend to vote Democratic it’s because they have clued in on this discrepancy and understand the motive is apocalyptic fundamentalism.

That’s true for the social cons/fundies in the party. “hawks” from both parties tend to think Israel is important as a bastion of democracy in the dictatorial middle east.

157 BryanS  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:01:58pm

re: #153 Obdicut

Er, I think you were supposed to read it, actually. Since that comment agrees with me and asks you what you don’t understand about Cantor’s statement.

Yes, and I agreed with the comment. If you’re trying to manufacture an argument, please stop trying to put words in my mouth so that the argument better fits what you prefer to argue about.

158 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:02:24pm

re: #156 BryanS

That’s true for the social cons/fundies in the party.

How many GOP congresspeople are not social conservatives, please?

159 researchok  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:03:05pm

The Jerusalem issue will be settled.

There will be a regular rotating mayoralty and equal number of city managers. City services will be split and no one side will be able to upend the other side. Religious inflammatory rhetoric will be turned down.

There will be religious assholes on both side who will want to stir the pot but they will be beat down.

Each sides wins.

One version or another of the above will prevail.

160 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:03:41pm

re: #157 BryanS

Yes, and I agreed with the comment. If you’re trying to manufacture an argument, please stop trying to put words in my mouth so that the argument better fits what you prefer to argue about.

I have no idea what you’re talking about. All you did was say “read comment #122”.

What words did I try to put in your mouth, exactly? That’s a really weird accusation to make.

161 _RememberTonyC  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:04:10pm

re: #148 JeffFX

Sorry, but it seemed like you were supporting the Republican illusion that they protect Israel from Obama, which of course is absurd. Perhaps I was mistaken.

I think Cantor is one of the more moderate Republicans. In fact, my cousin from Richmond is good friends with him. He may have overstepped here, but it is somewhat useful for Israel’s enemies and friends to know that now might be a good time for the Palestinians and the Arab nations who refuse to make peace to think about changing THEIR tune since there is a chance that in two years, the next US President COULD be less sympathetic to the Arab/Muslim side in this conflict. Just my two cents …

162 dog philosopher  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:04:48pm

eric cantor is a check on the myth that we hebrews are smarter than other people

163 Cheese Eating Victory Monkey  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:05:08pm

re: #140 Charles

George H. W. Bush called East Jerusalem “occupied territory:”

[Link: articles.chicagotribune.com…]

You probably know this already, but republican pro-Israel policy is a relatively new phenomenon. Bush 41 and Baker were known as being very tough on Israel in regards to settlements and keeping Israel out of the Gulf War. The Reagan Administration condemned Israel after the Osirak raid, the Lebanon invasion, and allowed the PLO to set up an office in DC. Going back further, Eisenhower was known for his cold relations with the state and pushing for the 1957 Sinai withdrawal. With the exception of Carter, all the Democrats Presidents are known for their warm treatment of the Jewish State.

164 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:05:48pm

re: #161 _RememberTonyC

But why would the next US president be less sympathetic? Obama’s policies are the same as Bush’s policies were when Bush had GOP majorities in the Senate and House. So what reason would there be to think a new GOP president would act any differently?

165 TedStriker  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:07:06pm

re: #156 BryanS

That’s true for the social cons/fundies in the party. “hawks” from both parties tend to think Israel is important as a bastion of democracy in the dictatorial middle east.

The TPers/socons are in the GOP driver’s seat right now….why else would Cantor even consider taking the tack he is and saying what he said to Bibi if he wasn’t trying to pander to them?

166 BryanS  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:07:22pm

re: #160 Obdicut

I have no idea what you’re talking about. All you did was say “read comment #122”.

What words did I try to put in your mouth, exactly? That’s a really weird accusation to make.

Not really a weird accusation. For the occasional times I come online here, I think any conversation I’ve had with you turns into you shouting down straw man arguments I never made. I agreed with the substance of that post—should have mentioned that when referring you to it AND my reply to it. I’ve made multiple comments stating that Obama’s policy is not allow that different from Bush’s, yet you keep suggesting I think otherwise.

167 researchok  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:07:32pm

re: #164 Obdicut

But why would the next US president be less sympathetic? Obama’s policies are the same as Bush’s policies were when Bush had GOP majorities in the Senate and House. So what reason would there be to think a new GOP president would act any differently?

Because the GOP needs to make noise about how much better they are.

Theater, IMO.

168 No Country For Old Haters  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:08:07pm

re: #161 _RememberTonyC

I think Cantor is one of the more moderate Republicans. In fact, my cousin from Richmond is good friends with him. He may have overstepped here, but it is somewhat useful for Israel’s enemies and friends to know that now might be a good time for the Palestinians and the Arab nations who refuse to make peace to think about changing THEIR tune since there is a chance that in two years, the next US President COULD be less sympathetic to the Arab/Muslim side in this conflict. Just my two cents …

I think it’s dreaming to think the Arab nations will change their tune after all these years of keeping the Palestinians in their plight. There are too many violent ideologues on either side, which is why no president is able to resolve the situation.

169 Amory Blaine  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:08:24pm

re: #164 Obdicut

Because it gels nicely with all the other lies about Obama. He’s muslim, therefore he hates Israel. Doesn’t have to be real, Cantor doesn’t have to say it, but as long as it’s implied the wingnuts approve.

170 No Country For Old Haters  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:09:16pm

re: #164 Obdicut

But why would the next US president be less sympathetic? Obama’s policies are the same as Bush’s policies were when Bush had GOP majorities in the Senate and House. So what reason would there be to think a new GOP president would act any differently?

Maybe because Republicans have become more extreme since Bush. Who knows what madness a Republican president would get up to thinking violence is the solution to the middle-east.

171 BryanS  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:10:24pm

re: #163 Cheese Eating Victory Monkey

You probably know this already, but republican pro-Israel policy is a relatively new phenomenon. Bush 41 and Baker were known as being very tough on Israel in regards to settlements and keeping Israel out of the Gulf War. The Reagan Administration condemned Israel after the Osirak raid, the Lebanon invasion, and allowed the PLO to set up an office in DC. Going back further, Eisenhower was known for his cold relations with the state and pushing for the 1957 Sinai withdrawal. With the exception of Carter, all the Democrats Presidents are known for their warm treatment of the Jewish State.

I kind of thought that link Charles posted showed a rather unusually friendly Bush Sr vis-a-vis Israel policy—to the point of picking sides on the settlement issue. But yes, I think the more sycophantic friendliness comes from the rise of social cons in the Republican party.

172 BryanS  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:11:18pm

re: #165 talon_262

The TPers/socons are in the GOP driver’s seat right now…why else would Cantor even consider taking the tack he is and saying what he said to Bibi if he wasn’t trying to pander to them?

Unfortunately that is true.

173 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:12:49pm

re: #166 BryanS

Not really a weird accusation. For the occasional times I come online here, I think any conversation I’ve had with you turns into you shouting down straw man arguments I never made.

That’s nice.

I agreed with the substance of that post—should have mentioned that when referring you to it AND my reply to it.

Yes, you should have.

I’ve made multiple comments stating that Obama’s policy is not allow that different from Bush’s, yet you keep suggesting I think otherwise.

No, I’m not suggesting that. I’m pointing out that, since Obama’s policy is not different from that of Bush and the GOP when they held both houses, Cantor saying that the GOP would make better allies makes no sense at all. Saying they will be a ‘check’ on Obama’s foreign policy makes no sense at all. I fully acknowledge that you have said that Obama’s policies have basically followed Bush’s— what I’m saying is that, therefore, Cantor’s statement doesn’t even work as simple pandering.

Dial down the outrage.

174 _RememberTonyC  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:13:01pm

re: #164 Obdicut

But why would the next US president be less sympathetic? Obama’s policies are the same as Bush’s policies were when Bush had GOP majorities in the Senate and House. So what reason would there be to think a new GOP president would act any differently?

I just want to make sure you didn’t misunderstand my comment. I said that a GOP president might be less sympathetic to the Arab/Muslim side. And why would I think a potential GOP POTUS might act differently than Bush or Obama? Maybe because of the Iran factor and the cancerous effect of it’s actions in Lebanon and it’s nuclear proliferation that will be more frightening in the upcoming months and years.

175 elizajane  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:14:31pm

re: #170 JeffFX

Maybe because Republicans have become more extreme since Bush. Who knows what madness a Republican president would get up to thinking violence is the solution to the middle-east.

Maybe they’d go around singing “Bo-bo-bo, bo-bomb Iran?”

Nah. Even the Republicans couldn’t be *that* nutty.

176 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:14:51pm

re: #174 _RememberTonyC

I just want to make sure you didn’t misunderstand my comment. I said that a GOP president might be less sympathetic to the Arab/Muslim side. And why would I think a potential GOP POTUS might act differently than Bush or Obama? Maybe because of the Iran factor and the cancerous effect of it’s actions in Lebanon and it’s nuclear proliferation that will be more frightening in the upcoming months and years.

Iran was around when Bush was around, too. I don’t find that at all a convincing argument.

You’re now in the realm of pure speculation, which has very little to do with what Cantor actually said and did.

177 _RememberTonyC  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:17:31pm

re: #168 JeffFX

I think it’s dreaming to think the Arab nations will change their tune after all these years of keeping the Palestinians in their plight. There are too many violent ideologues on either side, which is why no president is able to resolve the situation.

Believe me, I do not expect anything peaceful to come from the Arab side. I give credit to Israel fro trying, but I see no reciprocal actions from it’s enemies. But if there happen to be any people of actual goodwill on the Arab/Muslim side who see a better deal available now than what they may see in two years, that might spur something positive as far as possible breakthroughs. However, the chances of that happening are about 1-5%. Very sad …

178 Killgore Trout  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:18:02pm

Outrageous outrage explained…
School Responds: Boy Forced to Remove Flag for His Own ‘Safety,’ Can Fly it Again

Liveleak Video

You get the full explanation at 4:00. Since wingnuts made such a big deal trying to ban Mexican flags for Cinco de Mayo celebrations it seems Hispanic students were pissed that their flag is banned but others aren’t.
Lighten up on the whole flag issue and it won’t be a problem.

179 Max  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:18:29pm

re: #140 Charles

George H. W. Bush called East Jerusalem “occupied territory:”

[Link: articles.chicagotribune.com…]

One reason why Bush 41 is tied with Dwight Eisenhower for the title of “Least pro-Israel Presidents” (Catchy, I know).

180 _RememberTonyC  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:19:43pm

re: #176 Obdicut

Iran was around when Bush was around, too. I don’t find that at all a convincing argument.

You’re now in the realm of pure speculation, which has very little to do with what Cantor actually said and did.

We all speculate … No big deal there. You have done it as well. That is, unless you don’t see any of your own posts as speculative. It’s OK … That is why we are here …

181 Charles Johnson  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:21:29pm

re: #173 Obdicut

…what I’m saying is that, therefore, Cantor’s statement doesn’t even work as simple pandering.

Actually, I think it does work as simple pandering, because there’s no need for logic, facts, or consistency when pandering to that audience. I checked out a few wingnut blogs and they’re all cheering for Cantor.

182 _RememberTonyC  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:22:21pm

re: #179 Max D. Reinhardt

One reason why Bush 41 is tied with Dwight Eisenhower for the title of “Least pro-Israel Presidents” (Catchy, I know).

Jimmy Carter has them both by a mile

183 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:23:33pm

re: #180 _RememberTonyC

We all speculate … No big deal there. You have done it as well. That is, unless you don’t see any of your own posts as speculative. It’s OK … That is why we are here …

No, you’re not understanding me.

We started with Cantor implying to Israel that the GOP would be better allies for them than Obama would, even though Obama’s policies are the same as Bush’s. You then said that even Cantor may have overstepped, it’s good that in this time Israel’s friends and enemies know that the next president could be more sympathetic to Israel.

What I’m saying is there is no connection between Cantor’s remarks and actions here and the next president being more sympathetic to Israel. They’re totally separate issues.

184 TedStriker  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:23:52pm

re: #163 Cheese Eating Victory Monkey

You probably know this already, but republican pro-Israel policy is a relatively new phenomenon. Bush 41 and Baker were known as being very tough on Israel in regards to settlements and keeping Israel out of the Gulf War. The Reagan Administration condemned Israel after the Osirak raid, the Lebanon invasion, and allowed the PLO to set up an office in DC. Going back further, Eisenhower was known for his cold relations with the state and pushing for the 1957 Sinai withdrawal. With the exception of Carter, all the Democrats Presidents are known for their warm treatment of the Jewish State.

Unfortunately, I happen to agree the the coalition would have fallen apart in Desert Shield/Storm had Israel retaliated for Saddam’s Scud attacks…the Arab allies (including the Saudis) wouldn’t have stood for it and would have probably pulled out.

BTW, didn’t Nixon send the Israelis a metric shit-ton of materiel during the 1973 Yom Kippur War?

185 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:24:27pm

re: #181 Charles

Actually, I think it does work as simple pandering, because there’s no need for logic, facts, or consistency when pandering to that audience. I checked out a few wingnut blogs and they’re all cheering for Cantor.

Sorry, I meant it doesn’t work as simple pandering to Israel..

It works just fine as pandering to the wingnuts.

186 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:27:39pm

re: #185 Obdicut

Sorry, I meant it doesn’t work as simple pandering to Israel..



And it doesn’t work as pandering for those who actually care about Israel, for that matter.

187 _RememberTonyC  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:31:36pm

re: #183 Obdicut

No, you’re not understanding me.

We started with Cantor implying to Israel that the GOP would be better allies for them than Obama would, even though Obama’s policies are the same as Bush’s. You then said that even Cantor may have overstepped, it’s good that in this time Israel’s friends and enemies know that the next president could be more sympathetic to Israel.

What I’m saying is there is no connection between Cantor’s remarks and actions here and the next president being more sympathetic to Israel. They’re totally separate issues.

That is speculative too. Your implication is that the next GOP POTUS would have the same philosophy as Bush 43. You might be right, but you might be wrong. The next GOP POTUS might be more sympathetic to Israel than was Dubya. We are both speculating because neither you, me, or anyone else can know that for sure. Cantor is fishing for Jewish votes, pure and simple. The Dems fish for votes from different groups as well. When foreign policy is involved, it is more unseemly.

188 _RememberTonyC  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:33:58pm

Folks … I’m heading out for dinner and a flick. The new Ben Affleck film. Have a good night.

189 simoom  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:34:15pm

This reminds of of then Rep. Mark Kirk of Illinois (now Senator elect), traveled to China and met with Chinese leaders telling them not to trust the Administration’s budget estimates. The Treasury Secretary had just previously met with the Chinese to reassure them about their US Treasury Bond investments. Kirk then bragged about what he had done to some Washington think tank (and later on Fox News, where he really trashed the US dollar).

tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com

190 Political Atheist  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:35:33pm

re: #163 Cheese Eating Victory Monkey

You probably know this already, but republican pro-Israel policy is a relatively new phenomenon. Bush 41 and Baker were known as being very tough on Israel in regards to settlements and keeping Israel out of the Gulf War. The Reagan Administration condemned Israel after the Osirak raid, the Lebanon invasion, and allowed the PLO to set up an office in DC. Going back further, Eisenhower was known for his cold relations with the state and pushing for the 1957 Sinai withdrawal. With the exception of Carter, all the Democrats Presidents are known for their warm treatment of the Jewish State.

I would argue keeping Israel out of the Gulf war was the only sane policy. Of course overt military attack was condemned. That was likely agreed to in advance.

And we seem to have a terribly harsh standard for being pro or anti Israel or some shorthand phrase.

If we can point to a particular tough policy, like settlements we say “not a friend of Israel”

As I recall off hand all our Presidents have steadfastly defended Israels right to exist. Look at the economic support. Military support. Military sales. Every President has been a very good friend of Israel overall. Some are imperfect friends, some more than others. But that’s it. May as well be talking about Britain.

source-wrmea dot org

191 brookly red  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:36:37pm

OK, I will agree that Cantor overstepped here & more than likely for all the wrong reasons… however I am kinda more upset that yet again Israel is in the crossfire. Oh well.

192 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:36:51pm

re: #187 _RememberTonyC

No, you’re still missing my point.

Cantor was around back under Bush ‘43. He was in congress. He didn’t do anything to push Bush towards greater sympathy with Israel.

I’m saying that your speculation about the next president being more sympathetic to Israel is entirely irrelevant to the discussion of Cantor’s remarks, and that you made a logical leap when connecting the two.

Cantor is fishing for Jewish votes, pure and simple.

I disagree. I don’t think many Jews will be fooled by something that transparent. I think he’s throwing red meat to the wingnut, anti-Obama base.

193 Killgore Trout  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:37:24pm

I generally don’t follow the global Warming debate, it’s just not my thing. But I just heard an interview with the guy who made this movie…..
Cool It Trailer 2010 HD

Youtube Video

Somebody posted about this is the pages earlier this week and I didn’t really think much about it but I just heard the guy interviewed on the radio and it’s very interesting and I suspect he’s probably right. The movie isn’t what I first thought it was. It’s about smarter solutions. It’s about being realistic. Very interesting.

194 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:38:23pm

re: #191 brookly red

OK, I will agree that Cantor overstepped here & more than likely for all the wrong reasons… however I am kinda more upset that yet again Israel is in the crossfire. Oh well.

You’re right— even worse that Cantor’s bizarre attempt at sleazy politics on a domestic scale, he’s screwing with Israeli politics as well. That may be his intention, though.

195 BryanS  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:39:35pm

re: #189 simoom

This reminds of of then Rep. Mark Kirk of Illinois (now Senator elect), traveled to China and met with Chinese leaders telling them not to trust the Administration’s budget estimates. The Treasury Secretary had just previously met with the Chinese to reassure them about their US Treasury Bond investments. Kirk then bragged about what he had done to some Washington think tank (and later on Fox News, where he really trashed the US dollar).

[Link: tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com…]

Now that is just stupid and harmful of Kirk to do.

196 recusancy  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:40:35pm

re: #193 Killgore Trout

I generally don’t follow the global Warming debate, it’s just not my thing. But I just heard an interview with the guy who made this movie…
Cool It Trailer 2010 HD


[Video]Somebody posted about this is the pages earlier this week and I didn’t really think much about it but I just heard the guy interviewed on the radio and it’s very interesting and I suspect he’s probably right. The movie isn’t what I first thought it was. It’s about smarter solutions. It’s about being realistic. Very interesting.

dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com

197 Political Atheist  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:42:27pm

re: #193 Killgore Trout

First glance says “denier doc”. But that would be a serious disservice.

198 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:43:14pm

re: #193 Killgore Trout

Oh, it’s Lomborg? I’d be very suspicious of it. He’s not a scientist, and his recent 180 on climate change smells more to me like a new way to sell his new book than an honest change of heart.

To the extent he’s promoting the good, good, but I’d suspect a lot of what he proposes is for, one or another reason, unworkable. He really doesn’t do the due diligence.

199 brookly red  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:44:32pm

re: #194 Obdicut

You’re right— even worse that Cantor’s bizarre attempt at sleazy politics on a domestic scale, he’s screwing with Israeli politics as well. That may be his intention, though.

well I am not so sure about that, I kinda agree with the sentiment but I also agree that as a nation we speak better if we speak with with one voice. Hence the Logan law.

200 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:45:25pm

re: #199 brookly red

well I am not so sure about that, I kinda agree with the sentiment but I also agree that as a nation we speak better if we speak with with one voice. Hence the Logan law.

You agree with what sentiment?

201 Gus  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:46:18pm

re: #198 Obdicut

Oh, it’s Lomborg? I’d be very suspicious of it. He’s not a scientist, and his recent 180 on climate change smells more to me like a new way to sell his new book than an honest change of heart.

To the extent he’s promoting the good, good, but I’d suspect a lot of what he proposes is for, one or another reason, unworkable. He really doesn’t do the due diligence.

Yeah, Bjorn Lomborg’s been pretty much black listed.

202 Eclectic Infidel  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:46:56pm

re: #2 jamesfirecat

Do we have any Israeli (Wow wouldn’t have expected that to be spelled with an “I” at the end) Lizards on at the moment? do you have any insight to offer us on how your people tend to view the two major American parties?

I’m not Israeli, though I am zionist. I can tell you that otherwise left-leaning pro-Israel advocates tend to be anti-Obama and are quite convinced he’s out to stick it to Israel.

203 Eclectic Infidel  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:49:17pm

re: #26 SpaceJesus

Of course not, that’s why I said the fundie base.

Too bad the evangelical “convert the jews to protestant christianity yee-haw” group of the GOP is fucking huge though…

I remember a thread on here some years ago about Anne Coulter saying that Jews just needed to be “perfected” and I called her an idiot and a bigot, and half the folks around here defended her and dinged me down. gah

That ‘class’ of lizards have flounced their way outta here.

204 Killgore Trout  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:49:49pm

re: #197 Rightwingconspirator

First glance says “denier doc”. But that would be a serious disservice.

I think they made the trailer that way intentionally. It brings the wingnuts into the theater and outrageous the moonbats for publicity.

205 brookly red  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:49:54pm

re: #200 Obdicut

You agree with what sentiment?

it seems to me a given that the new Congress will be more pro Israel… but you can question their motivations of course.

206 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:50:25pm

I’m so far past the point of being surprised by this “want the president to fail” stuff, it’s just the way they behave now by default

207 albusteve  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:51:23pm

re: #203 eclectic infidel

That ‘class’ of lizards have flounced their way outta here.

a few flounced, most just left for unknown reasons

208 Gus  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:52:28pm

re: #204 Killgore Trout

I think they made the trailer that way intentionally. It brings the wingnuts into the theater and outrageous the moonbats for publicity.

IMO I would venture to guess that the wingnuts and the moonbats will hate it. You know how it is when you don’t follow the orthodoxy on a particular subject matter — especially this one.

209 Shiplord Kirel  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:52:44pm

The relationship with Israel has not been one-sided by any means. The huge haul of Soviet bloc military equipment captured in the 6 Day War was probably the greatest intelligence coup since World War 2. The Israelis shared it freely with the United States, at a time when large-scale US military aid to Israel had not yet started.
The Truth about Area 51: Project Have Doughnut and the Israeli connection.

210 albusteve  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:53:11pm

re: #206 WindUpBird

I’m so far past the point of being surprised by this “want the president to fail” stuff, it’s just the way they behave now by default

yeah, alot of people don’t seem to be able to groove with BO…business as usual

211 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:54:17pm

re: #210 albusteve

yeah, alot of people don’t seem to be able to groove with BO…business as usual

Going to other countries to specifically undermine and sabotage his diplomacy for the sake of the loony base, though? Seems sorta… whatdayacall iut…unAmerican to me

212 Killgore Trout  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:54:19pm

re: #201 Gus 802

Yeah, Bjorn Lomborg’s been pretty much black listed.

For what reason?

213 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:55:43pm

re: #205 brookly red

it seems to me a given that the new Congress will be more pro Israel… but you can question their motivations of course.

Why is it a given, though? That’s what there’s no support for.

214 bratwurst  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:56:10pm

re: #202 eclectic infidel

I’m not Israeli, though I am zionist. I can tell you that otherwise left-leaning pro-Israel advocates tend to be anti-Obama and are quite convinced he’s out to stick it to Israel.

I can only speak for myself…but this left-leaning pro-Israel advocate (whose support includes regular donations to Magen David Adom as well as spending my limited vacation time and money in Israel every other year) is pro-Obama and far from convinced he is out to “stick it to Israel”.

215 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:56:20pm

re: #152 albusteve

I don’t recall anyone questioning that…but then so what?…it’s not about Bush

It’s not about Bush, but it is about the Myth of Obama, which follows the Myth of Bush.

The Myth of Bush was that he was more pro-Israel than anyone had ever, ever, been.

The Myth of Obama is that he is more anti-Israel than anyone has ever, ever been.

Given this, is is worth comparing their actual policies, and noting their strong similarity to one another. Whether this speaks well or poorly for them is another question.

216 Killgore Trout  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:56:57pm

re: #208 Gus 802

IMO I would venture to guess that the wingnuts and the moonbats will hate it. You know how it is when you don’t follow the orthodoxy on a particular subject matter — especially this one.

I think that’s the reason I find it appealing. I also think his ideas might be more persuasive to conservatives. It’s what conservatives should be focusing on anyways; being more efficient with our solutions instead of no solutions at all.

217 albusteve  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:57:18pm

re: #209 Shiplord Kirel

The relationship with Israel has not been one-sided by any means. The huge haul of Soviet bloc military equipment captured in the 6 Day War was probably the greatest intelligence coup since World War 2. The Israelis shared it freely with the United States, at a time when large-scale US military aid to Israel had not yet started.
The Truth about Area 51: Project Have Doughnut and the Israeli connection.

interesting, thanks
remember the Soviet that flew his plane to Japan, opened the canopy waving his pistol around?…nobody has that style anymore

218 brookly red  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:57:24pm

re: #211 WindUpBird

Going to other countries to specifically undermine and sabotage his diplomacy for the sake of the loony base, though? Seems sorta… whatdayacall iut…unAmerican to me

NEW YORK — Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.) told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Wednesday during a meeting in New York that the new GOP majority…

I know many people find it hard to believe, but New York is not an other country. (we just play one on TV)

219 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:57:48pm

re: #212 Killgore Trout

For what reason?

He used to be a climate change denier, and he’s always been more about selling books and getting high appearance fees than serious research. He’s been found guilty of scientific dishonesty for his book “The Skeptical Environmentalist.”

He’s not a scientist but passes himself off as an expert on environmental issues, too.

He’s like the anti-Gore.

220 Usually refered to as anyways  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:58:07pm

re: #207 albusteve

a few flounced, most just left for unknown reasons

Are you serious?

221 Gus  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:58:17pm

re: #212 Killgore Trout

For what reason?

There are the scientific reasons which seem to have led to inconclusive decisions. Most of that came from Denmark. Another thing is that he doesn’t follow the narrative of “impending doom” that others adhere to. He takes a more middle of the road approach.

222 albusteve  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:58:47pm

re: #211 WindUpBird

Going to other countries to specifically undermine and sabotage his diplomacy for the sake of the loony base, though? Seems sorta… whatdayacall iut…unAmerican to me

how so?….sounds like a bunch of poliblabber to me…not too cool,but hardly sabotage

223 Gus  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:58:52pm

re: #219 Obdicut

He used to be a climate change denier, and he’s always been more about selling books and getting high appearance fees than serious research. He’s been found guilty of scientific dishonesty for his book “The Skeptical Environmentalist.”

He’s not a scientist but passes himself off as an expert on environmental issues, too.

He’s like the anti-Gore.

We used to have a lot of climate change deniers here at LGF.

224 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:59:23pm

re: #221 Gus 802

The times piece that was linked above is a pretty even-handed treatment of him.

dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com

225 Gus  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 2:59:58pm

re: #223 Gus 802

We used to have a lot of climate change deniers here at LGF.

I mean ones that went from denying to accepting the science. I will say this. One can accept the science but not accept all of the rhetoric.

226 Gus  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:01:06pm

re: #224 Obdicut

The times piece that was linked above is a pretty even-handed treatment of him.

[Link: dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com…]

That’s what I figured. He got a thumbs up from the NY Times and the LA Times. Has to be something of value there one would think.

227 Killgore Trout  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:01:13pm

re: #221 Gus 802

There are the scientific reasons which seem to have led to inconclusive decisions. Most of that came from Denmark. Another thing is that he doesn’t follow the narrative of “impending doom” that others adhere to. He takes a more middle of the road approach.

Ah, ok. My enthusiasm for the Global warming issue has been brief but I’m better now.

228 albusteve  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:01:15pm

re: #215 SanFranciscoZionist

It’s not about Bush, but it is about the Myth of Obama, which follows the Myth of Bush.

The Myth of Bush was that he was more pro-Israel than anyone had ever, ever, been.

The Myth of Obama is that he is more anti-Israel than anyone has ever, ever been.

Given this, is is worth comparing their actual policies, and noting their strong similarity to one another. Whether this speaks well or poorly for them is another question.

tossing in a Bush or two adds some perspective, but it’s BO’s game now….one has to wonder how widespread this anti-Israel meme goes

229 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:03:40pm

re: #225 Gus 802

Ooh, that Times article has a much, much better treatment of the subject linked in it, by Professor Smalley:

Google Video

230 albusteve  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:04:08pm

re: #220 ozbloke

Are you serious?

once in a while

231 Killgore Trout  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:04:48pm

re: #230 albusteve

once in a while

Was that sarcasm?
/

232 Gus  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:06:59pm

re: #229 Obdicut

Ooh, that Times article has a much, much better treatment of the subject linked in it, by Professor Smalley:

[Video]

Needs more special effects. ;)

233 brookly red  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:07:15pm

re: #228 albusteve

tossing in a Bush or two adds some perspective, but it’s BO’s game now…one has to wonder how widespread this anti-Israel meme goes

I think BO like all the others before want the holy grail of being able to say that they were the one who brought peace to the ME… and as all the others before him under estimated the scope of that project.

234 Political Atheist  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:07:16pm

re: #225 Gus 802

A salient error that marks true hard core advocacy is this tendency to overheat. Handgun Control Inc and the NRA. Even AGW & environmental advocates. You get silly suggestions ill tied to reality. Conjecture and overstatements. Add partisan rancor and one can easily see the damage done to the cause via damaged credibility.

235 insanity police  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:07:21pm

re: #150 bratwurst

How much evidence do you need that the Obama policy toward Israel has not been very different than that of any previous administration?

I witness the difference. I listen to what Obama is saying, how his administration acts towards Israel. I think his strategy is misguided at best.

First, Obama’s strategy of making settlements THE issue has made negotiations difficult for both sides.

Now we’re all up a tree

Why does the US insist that pressuring Israel over settlements is the way to bring Abbas back to peace talks, when Abbas says it isn’t?

236 brookly red  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:08:44pm

re: #230 albusteve

once in a while

Q. does that dog bite?

A. sometimes…

237 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:09:06pm

re: #235 insanity police

Why do you say that Obama has made settlements the issue, though?

How has his policy differed from Bush’s on them?

238 insanity police  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:09:24pm

re: #235 insanity police


Where the Obama administration has differed from many of its predecessors is in making this area of disagreement so publicly central to peace efforts. And in so doing, it has serially derailed the very efforts it is ostensibly seeking to encourage.

239 Usually refered to as anyways  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:09:31pm

re: #230 albusteve

once in a while

Funny how mistaken I was was, because I thought most flounced once their views were challanged, and with the echo chamber questioned and as they struggled to defend their arguments buthurt set in.

Thank for setting me straight.

240 Gus  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:10:19pm

re: #234 Rightwingconspirator

A salient error that marks true hard core advocacy is this tendency to overheat. Handgun Control Inc and the NRA. Even AGW & environmental advocates. You get silly suggestions ill tied to reality. Conjecture and overstatements. Add partisan rancor and one can easily see the damage done to the cause via damaged credibility.

My response to COP15 was to completely shut off what I was hearing. That side show turned into a blame the West fest and unsubstantiated claims. Including what seemed like a lot of smaller countries begging for billions of dollars (from the West of course) and a lot of guilt riddled rhetoric. Most of time it was led by the evil regime of Sudan with China pulling the strings in the background. So, they wanted so much that in the end they got nothing.

241 freetoken  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:12:19pm

re: #240 Gus 802

COP15, like any UN meeting which includes nearly all nations, turns into a stage on which very many agendas are played. In some cases the nominal reason for the meeting becomes merely a pretext for a different issue.

242 abbyadams  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:12:31pm

re: #10 Charles

Actually, I was unaware of the Syria trip. More things I’ve learned at this blog. :-) Nevertheless, I agree…this is much worse.

243 albusteve  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:13:12pm

re: #239 ozbloke

Funny how mistaken I was was, because I thought most flounced once their views were challanged, and with the echo chamber questioned and as they struggled to defend their arguments buthurt set in.

Thank for setting me straight.

no problem, anytime

244 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:13:39pm

re: #238 insanity police

I have no idea what you’re talking about. How has he made it publicly central in a way that others haven’t?

245 insanity police  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:13:54pm

re: #237 Obdicut

Why do you say that Obama has made settlements the issue, though?

How has his policy differed from Bush’s on them?

I didn’t see Bush acting so antagonistic on the issue of building in Jerusalem like Obama has. What business is it of the U.S. if Israel builds in its capital? If Netanyahu tells us not to build in Washington, I would expect we would tell him to buzz off.

246 insanity police  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:14:47pm

re: #244 Obdicut

Did you read the article I cited?

jpost.com

247 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:14:49pm

re: #245 insanity police

So you missed Condi’s criticism of Israel over the exact same issue?

248 HoosierHoops  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:15:03pm

re: #207 albusteve

a few flounced, most just left for unknown reasons

Oh frick’n please Steve…I’ve read hundreds of flounces here…
None were for unknown reasons…They were perfectly clear in intent

249 albusteve  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:15:05pm

re: #240 Gus 802

My response to COP15 was to completely shut off what I was hearing. That side show turned into a blame the West fest and unsubstantiated claims. Including what seemed like a lot of smaller countries begging for billions of dollars (from the West of course) and a lot of guilt riddled rhetoric. Most of time it was led by the evil regime of Sudan with China pulling the strings in the background. So, they wanted so much that in the end they got nothing.

just as well we don’t get dragged into a wildly expensive for nothing clusterfuck….reducing greenhouse gasses is a national security problem, start there

250 dog philosopher  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:15:22pm

hey! just checking up on freeperville and saw this:

Charles Johnson (LGF) completes his journey (vanity)
Vanity ^ | today | Me

Posted on Saturday, November 13, 2010 2:30:30 PM by HearMe

Charles Johnson (LGF) completes his journey

Charles Johnson of LGF who has veered to the Left with hatred of Republicans and the defense of all things Obama and Muslim like a schizophrenic off his meds, has now completed his journey.

Johnson -who once was praised for his support for Israel- has no gone so deep into Obama sycophancy that he now criticizes Eric Cantor’s meeting with Netanyahu to buttress Israeli/American friendship in the face of Obama’s obvious assault on the relationship.

littlegreenfootballs.com

Johnson used to post an Idolitarian contest, for the biggest Leftist fool. No more need for such contests, Johnson now wins by default.

251 Gus  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:15:46pm

re: #241 freetoken

COP15, like any UN meeting which includes nearly all nations, turns into a stage on which very many agendas are played. In some cases the nominal reason for the meeting becomes merely a pretext for a different issue.

Well yes. It was more like a hearing on Human Rights of Women in the UN being led by Saudi Arabia. ;) But that was not the original selling point of COP15 which was supposed to be a significant gathering. Frankly, they’re creating far too much paperwork and in the end it become a legal fest with more attorneys in the mix than scientists, and more importantly, the technical people and industry.

252 albusteve  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:16:04pm

re: #248 HoosierHoops

Oh frick’n please Steve…I’ve read hundreds of flounces here…
None were for unknown reasons…They were perfectly clear in intent

hundreds?…I doubt that, but you misread my post

253 insanity police  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:16:16pm

re: #247 Obdicut

I did not miss what Condi was saying, although I think she wasn’t as antagonistic on the issue. However, I thought she was an idiot on the issue too.

254 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:16:22pm

re: #246 insanity police

I’m very aware that there’s that meme being pushed. I’d say that those pushing it are the ones who are making an enormous deal out of the settlements, actually.

255 goddamnedfrank  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:16:51pm

re: #213 Obdicut

Why is it a given, though? That’s what there’s no support for.

In fact the House blue dogs got decimated far worse than the liberal wing of the Democratic Party, and were replaced by apocalyptic Teapublican fundies hellbent on getting us and IDF into a shooting war with Iran. The apocalyptic fundamentalists see this as metaphysically inevitable, and any non-militaristic attempts at countering Iran’s nuclear ambitions as being intrinsically anti-Israel. The truth though is that they just want to get Israel into another war as a means to the end, under the guise of caring deeply for its security. It’s a Death Eater mentality.

256 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:16:55pm

re: #245 insanity police

I didn’t see Bush acting so antagonistic on the issue of building in Jerusalem like Obama has. What business is it of the U.S. if Israel builds in its capital? If Netanyahu tells us not to build in Washington, I would expect we would tell him to buzz off.

I quite agree that it’s none of the U.S.’s damn business, but links above do show that the Bush administration was also opposed to building in Jerusalem, and made public statements against it. Do you feel these were significantly different?

257 palomino  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:17:43pm

The gop base decided long ago that Obama’s connections to Islam (funny name, Muslim dad, living in Indonesia—none of which was his choice) made him suspicious; in extreme cases, this marks him as a secret Muslim terrorist sympathizer. Either way, they just don’t believe he’s one of us, a real American.

Thus it’s no surprise that they would see Obama as so un-American that he doesn’t even deserve their allegiance relative to foreign govts.

258 Gus  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:18:35pm

re: #249 albusteve

just as well we don’t get dragged into a wildly expensive for nothing clusterfuck…reducing greenhouse gasses is a national security problem, start there

Yes. And the best way to get there is by shutting down Yucca Mountain permanently.

///

259 albusteve  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:18:57pm

clearly Bush controls BO’s foreign policy

260 freetoken  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:19:16pm

re: #251 Gus 802

Yet any international agreement of the size needed will still have to climb the same mountain, so to speak. The world is a diverse place, with many different groups who see things differently. All international agreements face the same issue. Environmental ones in particular are hard to develop when so much is at stake - that’s why I brought up the last CITES meeting here as it can be sort of like a UNFCCC COP at times (when someone wants to put an economically important species on the agenda, like blue fin tuna.)

261 dog philosopher  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:19:37pm

[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com…]

…which is of course a link right back to this page

so, if a web crawling spider programatically follows all links it finds on a page, and the link is to the same page that it appears on - will the recursivity of this cause infinite recursion and make the google server crash when it falls off the top of the stack?

262 palomino  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:20:01pm

re: #259 albusteve

clearly Bush controls BO’s foreign policy

domestic policy too, just look at bailouts

263 Varek Raith  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:20:08pm

re: #258 Gus 802

Yes. And the best way to get there is by shutting down Yucca Mountain permanently.

///

On a serious note, all this time wasted fighting for the Yucca Mountain complex is ludicrous.
Shit, we could’ve found and started construction on another location.

264 insanity police  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:20:21pm

re: #256 SanFranciscoZionist

I quite agree that it’s none of the U.S.’s damn business, but links above do show that the Bush administration was also opposed to building in Jerusalem, and made public statements against it. Do you feel these were significantly different?

I think there is a difference. See this Haaretz article:

The U.S. incentives package would also include: curbing actions by the United Nations on the Goldstone Report; blocking anti-Israel UN resolutions concerning the Gaza flotilla raid; defeating international resolutions aimed at exposing Israel’s nuclear program at the International Atomic Energy Agency; and strengthening pressure on Iran and Syria in regards to their nuclear and proliferation activities.

These are incentives? This is what Bush would have done anyways. With Obama I sense much more pressure on Israel. I don’t think he is a friend of Israel like Bush, although some of Bush’s policies were terrible for Israel.

265 brookly red  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:20:39pm

re: #256 SanFranciscoZionist

I quite agree that it’s none of the U.S.’s damn business, but links above do show that the Bush administration was also opposed to building in Jerusalem, and made public statements against it. Do you feel these were significantly different?

the only thing I see different is the situation, Iran is changing the facts on the ground.

266 HoosierHoops  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:20:44pm

re: #252 albusteve

hundreds?…I doubt that, but you misread my post

maybe..But Hundreds is not an exaggeration..The great flounce of 2009 was dozens per night..every night..
Oklahoma 45-7 over Tech..Good football..good beer brother

267 Gus  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:20:48pm

re: #260 freetoken

Yet any international agreement of the size needed will still have to climb the same mountain, so to speak. The world is a diverse place, with many different groups who see things differently. All international agreements face the same issue. Environmental ones in particular are hard to develop when so much is at stake - that’s why I brought up the last CITES meeting here as it can be sort of like a UNFCCC COP at times (when someone wants to put an economically important species on the agenda, like blue fin tuna.)

We need to start here, domestically. As they say, think globally, act locally.

268 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:20:57pm

re: #259 albusteve

clearly Bush controls BO’s foreign policy

No, but both of them follow the same basic pattern. Obama is not breaking any new ground in U.S. policy in this area. Which leaves the mystery of why so many people can ‘just feel’ that he’s bad for Israel, who did not have the same feeling about the previous administration.

269 insanity police  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:21:11pm

re: #254 Obdicut

I think Obama is putting an emphasis on the settlements. It’s obvious and counterproductive.

270 freetoken  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:21:41pm

re: #267 Gus 802

We need to start here, domestically. As they say, think globally, act locally.

Something to read:

The coal bosses’ plan: mine coal, sell coal, repeat until rich

271 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:21:57pm

re: #253 insanity police

I did not miss what Condi was saying, although I think she wasn’t as antagonistic on the issue. However, I thought she was an idiot on the issue too.

And you also realize that she was Bush’s secretary of state and speaking for his administration, yes?

272 Gus  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:22:00pm

re: #263 Varek Raith

On a serious note, all this time wasted fighting for the Yucca Mountain complex is ludicrous.
Shit, we could’ve found and started construction on another location.

Fighting it, defending it, and construction costs. All down the drain. And all of that required the expending of, ironically, more energy.

273 palomino  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:22:16pm

re: #265 brookly red

the only thing I see different is the situation, Iran is changing the facts on the ground.

Didn’t Bush pronounce Iran as part of Axis of Evil eight years ago? The “facts on the ground” had already been changed.

274 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:22:39pm

re: #269 insanity police

I think Obama is putting an emphasis on the settlements. It’s obvious and counterproductive.

That’s really not much of an argument, dude. Clinton put emphasis on the settlements. So did Bush. So why is Obama’s emphasis so distinctly different and bad?

275 wrenchwench  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:22:57pm

re: #250 engineer dog

Charles Johnson of LGF who has veered to the Left with hatred of Republicans and the defense of all things Obama and Muslim like a schizophrenic off his meds, has now completed his journey.

It’s easy for all of one’s predictions to come true when you get to make up the “facts” as you go along.

276 Wendell Zurkowitz (slave of the waffle light)  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:22:58pm

re: #269 insanity police

I think Obama is putting an emphasis on the settlements. It’s obvious and counterproductive.

Settlements in themselves are obviously counterproductive

277 albusteve  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:23:15pm

re: #268 SanFranciscoZionist

No, but both of them follow the same basic pattern. Obama is not breaking any new ground in U.S. policy in this area. Which leaves the mystery of why so many people can ‘just feel’ that he’s bad for Israel, who did not have the same feeling about the previous administration.

don’t dwell on it too long…there is no mystery, the hounds are loose on the right

278 Aceofwhat?  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:23:57pm

re: #272 Gus 802

Fighting it, defending it, and construction costs. All down the drain. And all of that required the expending of, ironically, more energy.

It’s not a proud moment for the Dems on the topic of clean energy, that’s for sure.

Oh, and howdy honcos!

279 palomino  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:24:01pm

re: #268 SanFranciscoZionist

No, but both of them follow the same basic pattern. Obama is not breaking any new ground in U.S. policy in this area. Which leaves the mystery of why so many people can ‘just feel’ that he’s bad for Israel, who did not have the same feeling about the previous administration.

Same reason people think he’s Stalin’s second coming—mass hysteria. They feel it in their gut, so why should things like actions, words, facts even matter?

280 Romantic Heretic  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:24:26pm

re: #49 negativ

This times eleventy. Buncha gutless wonders. I’m not a Democrat, nor am I necessarily a big fan of Democrats. At the moment, I’m just far more disgusted by the GOP. With the extremely rare exception, Dems seem to have battered wife syndrome, or something. To my probably stupid way of thinking, if they’d put political sharks like James Carville and Bill Clinton at the head of the DNC, with a charismatic guy like Barack Obama in the spotlight, that would be a force to be reckoned with (for better or worse). All I see from the Dems is futile flailing around and just generally seeming willfully impotent.

Meanwhile, the inmates are taking over the asylum…

If the Dems had any balls the GOP in its current state would be referred to as a ‘target rich environment’.

281 brookly red  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:24:32pm

re: #269 insanity police

I think Obama is putting an emphasis on the settlements. It’s obvious and counterproductive.

no and the Palies are are putting emphasis on it, his error is allowing them to call the tune. (Damn I hate defending him)

282 prairiefire  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:24:44pm

re: #274 Obdicut

Hey, Obdi. Are there still many reports of bedbugs in NYC? We are going to visit the Big Apple next summer, but I’m not sure if we will be staying there or in CN.

283 Varek Raith  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:24:55pm

re: #278 Aceofwhat?

It’s not a proud moment for the Dems on the topic of clean energy, that’s for sure.

Oh, and howdy honcos!

Hell, it reflects poorly on anyone still trying for Yucca Mountain.
Forget it. It’s a lost cause.
Find another place.

284 albusteve  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:25:12pm

re: #276 ralphieboy

Settlements in themselves are obviously counterproductive

NOMAD POWER!

285 palomino  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:25:22pm

re: #277 albusteve

don’t dwell on it too long…there is no mystery, the hounds are loose on the right

Problem is the Dem hounds are beagles, the gop hounds are bulldogs

286 Gus  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:25:33pm

re: #270 freetoken

Something to read:

The coal bosses’ plan: mine coal, sell coal, repeat until rich

True. But Americans want cheaper electrical rates. In many places they’re starting to hit the roof and Americans are already overextended. It has doubled in some locales. We can’t very well snap our fingers and say that higher energy costs would result in less CO2 emissions and expect the working and middle classes to bear that burden. That’s why coal is popular. Because it’s cheap and that allows an already marginalized middle class the ability to make ends meet.

287 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:25:41pm

re: #273 palomino

Didn’t Bush pronounce Iran as part of Axis of Evil eight years ago? The “facts on the ground” had already been changed.

Yes, but then we took out Iraq, and Bush took North Korea off the list—I don’t think Iran can be an axis by itself, technically speaking.

Iran ain’t doing much that’s new, although they are making progress on it.

288 insanity police  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:25:46pm

re: #271 Obdicut

And you also realize that she was Bush’s secretary of state and speaking for his administration, yes?

Sure, I get that. I think Condi was bad on Israel on some issues, but not all. Bush was friendly to Israel, and you can’t dispute that. I have no faith or trust in Obama on Israel. That’s my opinion. I feel like he would sell out Israel, and that is the opinion of many Jews, and most Israelis. I’m glad Cantor has more power. I’m not all for the Republicans, but on the issue of Israel they have been much better for the Jewish State. I think a strong Israel is good for the U.S. A Palestinian state won’t help the U.S. one bit.

289 brookly red  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:26:42pm

re: #273 palomino

Didn’t Bush pronounce Iran as part of Axis of Evil eight years ago? The “facts on the ground” had already been changed.

no, eight years ago Iran was not enriching uranium or arming proxies in Lebanon… things have changed.

290 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:26:42pm

re: #282 prairiefire

Hey, Obdi. Are there still many reports of bedbugs in NYC? We are going to visit the Big Apple next summer, but I’m not sure if we will be staying there or in CN.

I’ve heard plenty of reports but don’t know anyone who actually has them. But I don’t know a ton of people yet.

291 Gus  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:27:05pm

re: #283 Varek Raith

Hell, it reflects poorly on anyone still trying for Yucca Mountain.
Forget it. It’s a lost cause.
Find another place.

OK, but I guarantee you this. If they do find another location the NIMBYism will start all over again. Ironically, we have a lot to learn from the Europeans on nuclear waste — putting aside the European far-left.

292 insanity police  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:27:13pm

re: #274 Obdicut

That’s really not much of an argument, dude. Clinton put emphasis on the settlements. So did Bush. So why is Obama’s emphasis so distinctly different and bad?

There is a big difference between Obama’s approach. He is openly antagonistic to Israel. My head’s not in the sand and I’m not making it up. I’m not trying to argue with you. I think it’s obvious, but I won’t change your mind.

293 Aceofwhat?  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:27:16pm

re: #274 Obdicut

That’s really not much of an argument, dude. Clinton put emphasis on the settlements. So did Bush. So why is Obama’s emphasis so distinctly different and bad?

i would dearly love to argue this point with you, but you’re quite correct, which is giving me some trouble in creating a valid counterpoint…

294 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:27:33pm

re: #288 insanity police

Sure, I get that. I think Condi was bad on Israel on some issues, but not all. Bush was friendly to Israel, and you can’t dispute that.

This is really weird. You’re acting as though Condi was somehow not connected to Bush.

I get that you’re perpetuating the “Bush friendly to Israel, Obama not” meme even when their policies are basically identical.

295 albusteve  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:27:38pm

re: #283 Varek Raith

Hell, it reflects poorly on anyone still trying for Yucca Mountain.
Forget it. It’s a lost cause.
Find another place.

lol!….let’s ask the greenies where their backup location would be

296 Varek Raith  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:28:02pm

re: #291 Gus 802

OK, but I guarantee you this. If they do find another location the NIMBYism will start all over again. Ironically, we have a lot to learn from the Europeans on nuclear waste — putting aside the European far-left.

I didn’t like Yucca to begin with.
Too close to seismically active regions, imo.

297 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:28:12pm

re: #292 insanity police

You’re just not actually making an argument beyond ‘it’s obvious’. You’re not going to convince anyone who isn’t already anti-Obama.

298 wrenchwench  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:28:32pm

re: #295 albusteve

lol!…let’s ask the greenies where their backup location would be

WIPP!

299 brookly red  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:28:38pm

re: #287 SanFranciscoZionist

Yes, but then we took out Iraq, and Bush took North Korea off the list—I don’t think Iran can be an axis by itself, technically speaking.

Iran ain’t doing much that’s new, although they are making progress on it.

you make a good point, but Iran is pulling a lot of strings…

300 Gus  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:28:40pm

re: #296 Varek Raith

I didn’t like Yucca to begin with.
Too close to seismically active regions, imo.

That counts out most of the west.

301 insanity police  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:28:54pm

re: #281 brookly red

no and the Palies are are putting emphasis on it, his error is allowing them to call the tune. (Damn I hate defending him)

I think Obama is falling for their b.s. Clinton learned that Arafat didn’t really want peace. The settlements are just an excuse for not making peace.

If Israel put down their guns now they would be destroyed. If the Palestinians put their guns down they would have peace and a state.

302 prairiefire  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:28:55pm

re: #290 Obdicut

I’ve heard plenty of reports but don’t know anyone who actually has them. But I don’t know a ton of people yet.

You know, my cousin lives on the Upper East side. I would be happy to connect you with him if you wanted any East Side news.

Noodles & Co. awaits, amigos.

303 Aceofwhat?  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:29:03pm

re: #283 Varek Raith

Hell, it reflects poorly on anyone still trying for Yucca Mountain.
Forget it. It’s a lost cause.
Find another place.

Except that i don’t want folks to forget why it’s a lost cause. It’s a lost cause because there are also Democrats who will sacrifice science at the altar of political expediency, a fact occasionally forgotten by some.

304 brookly red  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:29:16pm

re: #295 albusteve

lol!…let’s ask the greenies where their backup location would be

Newark, NJ…

305 wrenchwench  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:29:18pm

re: #293 Aceofwhat?

i would dearly love to argue this point with you, but you’re quite correct, which is giving me some trouble in creating a valid counterpoint…

I like your style.

306 palomino  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:29:41pm

re: #289 brookly red

no, eight years ago Iran was not enriching uranium or arming proxies in Lebanon… things have changed.

Of course they’re farther along now, but we knew for a fact 8 years ago that they were pursuing nukes and aiding terrorists. That’s why they were on the Axis list to begin with.

307 Aceofwhat?  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:29:55pm

re: #296 Varek Raith

I didn’t like Yucca to begin with.
Too close to seismically active regions, imo.

so you were worried that nuclear waste buried deep in rock might shift and fall deeper into rock? help me out here.

308 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:30:08pm

re: #303 Aceofwhat?

Except that i don’t want folks to forget why it’s a lost cause. It’s a lost cause because there are also Democrats who will sacrifice science at the altar of political expediency, a fact occasionally forgotten by some.

That is a very, very inadequate statement. What ‘science’ is being sacrificed, exactly?

309 Varek Raith  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:30:54pm

re: #303 Aceofwhat?

Except that i don’t want folks to forget why it’s a lost cause. It’s a lost cause because there are also Democrats who will sacrifice science at the altar of political expediency, a fact occasionally forgotten by some.

Meh, I’m a realist.
Yucca is just too radioactive (pun!) now. This can drag on for decades with no resolution while we still have no place to store waste.

310 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:31:05pm

At this point in the nuclear energy game we shouldn’t be talking about storing waste at all, but reprocessing it.

That’s what the current state of the science is.

311 insanity police  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:31:09pm

re: #294 Obdicut

This is really weird. You’re acting as though Condi was somehow not connected to Bush.

I get that you’re perpetuating the “Bush friendly to Israel, Obama not” meme even when their policies are basically identical.

No, Condi was working for Bush. Condi was sympathetic to Palestinians in some ways. But she didn’t blast Israel regularly like this administration has done.

312 goddamnedfrank  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:31:10pm

re: #274 Obdicut

That’s really not much of an argument, dude. Clinton put emphasis on the settlements. So did Bush. So why is Obama’s emphasis so distinctly different and bad?

He’s a black Democrat with a muslim dad and step dad, he’s the perfect storm for wingnuts to rage against. Perception has become reality, his actual policies are irrelevant.

313 recusancy  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:31:45pm

re: #303 Aceofwhat?

Except that i don’t want folks to forget why it’s a lost cause. It’s a lost cause because there are also Democrats who will sacrifice science at the altar of political expediency, a fact occasionally forgotten by some.

Its a lost cause because constituents don’t want it there.

314 Eclectic Infidel  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:31:58pm

re: #214 bratwurst

I can only speak for myself…but this left-leaning pro-Israel advocate (whose support includes regular donations to Magen David Adom as well as spending my limited vacation time and money in Israel every other year) is pro-Obama and far from convinced he is out to “stick it to Israel”.

I should have qualified that post by also mentioning that the zionists I speak of are ones who are part of our small band of brothers who counter the hatred on the streets. Not all of ‘em are anti-Obama either, but it is curious watching the left-leaning ones use the same language as those on the ‘right’.

315 brookly red  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:32:15pm

re: #301 insanity police

I think Obama is falling for their b.s. Clinton learned that Arafat didn’t really want peace. The settlements are just an excuse for not making peace.

If Israel put down their guns now they would be destroyed. If the Palestinians put their guns down they would have peace and a state.

awww fuck, are you going to make me defend Clinton too…

Mama said there would be days like this…

316 albusteve  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:32:26pm

re: #298 wrenchwench

WIPP!

WIPP it good!…then there are the Finns for example, about a mile deep in solid rock and clay
articles.cnn.com

317 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:32:31pm

re: #289 brookly red

no, eight years ago Iran was not enriching uranium or arming proxies in Lebanon… things have changed.

Four years ago, Iranian folk dancers were hopping around with vials of uranium on the front of my newspaper. It was a bit alarming.

Iran was endorsing Hezbollah’s political activities as early as the early 90s. Were they really providing them no financial aid in 2002?

318 insanity police  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:32:51pm

re: #297 Obdicut

You’re just not actually making an argument beyond ‘it’s obvious’. You’re not going to convince anyone who isn’t already anti-Obama.

I’m not anti-Obama. I think he is bad on Israel for numerous reasons. Bush was never so openly critical of Israel. I didn’t see Bush crapping his pants over building in Jewish neighborhoods in Israel. I didn’t see Bush threatening to let anti-Israel resolutions pass in the U.N. It is night and day.

319 Aceofwhat?  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:32:57pm

re: #305 wrenchwench

I like your style.

no worries…i’ll say something annoyingly right-wing here before too long/

320 Gus  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:33:22pm

Right now nuclear waste is being stored on site. That means the federal government has to pay the nuclear operators because the federal government guaranteed offsite nuclear waste disposal location. This runs into a) law suits and b) final payments all of which total into the billions of dollars. These billions of dollars becomes and additional burden on debt and like all money it requires energy to be created and eventually payed off.

321 albusteve  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:33:27pm

re: #300 Gus 802

That counts out most of the west.

exactly, even wild, remote NM

322 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:33:33pm

re: #318 insanity police

You saw Condi, Bush’s Secretary of State, openly opposing settlements, but for some reason that just doesn’t matter to you.

I don’t get it.

323 Varek Raith  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:33:39pm

re: #307 Aceofwhat?

so you were worried that nuclear waste buried deep in rock might shift and fall deeper into rock? help me out here.

Beats me, man!
My mind just thinks, earthquakes+bad stuff in cans+Murphy’s Law=We’re boned.

324 SanFranciscoZionist  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:34:27pm

re: #314 eclectic infidel

I should have qualified that post by also mentioning that the zionists I speak of are ones who are part of our small band of brothers who counter the hatred on the streets. Not all of ‘em are anti-Obama either, but it is curious watching the left-leaning ones use the same language as those on the ‘right’.

It’s creepy as hell, is what it is.

Did I just say that?

325 brookly red  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:34:34pm

re: #306 palomino

Of course they’re farther along now, but we knew for a fact 8 years ago that they were pursuing nukes and aiding terrorists. That’s why they were on the Axis list to begin with.

well it has gotten to the point where the shit may hit the fan and IMO it would be an ounce of prevention to make a firm stand.

326 Gus  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:34:38pm

re: #321 albusteve

exactly, even wild, remote NM

Right. But you know what happens next. You have to truck the nuclear waste across state lines. Then you have to deal with potential opposition from states when that waste cross state lines. Again we have another controversy.

327 insanity police  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:35:13pm

re: #322 Obdicut

You saw Condi, Bush’s Secretary of State, openly opposing settlements, but for some reason that just doesn’t matter to you.

I don’t get it.

I was no fan of Condi. She stopped Israel military action to destroy terrorists in Lebanon. She compared Palestinians to slaves. Not a fan. But Obama is worse, or if he is at least as bad, then that’s not good either.

328 Varek Raith  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:35:14pm

re: #326 Gus 802

Right. But you know what happens next. You have to truck the nuclear waste across state lines. Then you have to deal with potential opposition from states when that waste cross state lines. Again we have another controversy.

Why don’t we reprocess it?

329 Eclectic Infidel  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:35:50pm

re: #324 SanFranciscoZionist

It’s creepy as hell, is what it is.

Did I just say that?

Yup.

330 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:35:52pm

re: #326 Gus 802

Here’s Stephen Chu being all nuanced and shit:

“Yucca Mountain as a repository is off the table. What we’re going to be doing is saying, let’s step back. We realize that we know a lot more today than we did 25 or 30 years ago. The NRC is saying that the dry cask storage at current sites would be safe for many decades, so that gives us time to figure out what we should do for a long-term strategy. We will be assembling a blue-ribbon panel to look at the issue. We’re looking at reactors that have a high-energy neutron spectrum that can actually allow you to burn down the long-lived actinide waste. These are fast-neutron reactors. There’s others: a resurgence of hybrid solutions of fusion fission where the fusion would impart not only energy, but again creates high-energy neutrons that can burn down the long-lived actinides. …
“Some of the waste is already vitrified. There is, in my mind, no economical reason why you would ever think of pulling it back into a potential fuel cycle. So one could well imagine—again, it depends on what the blue-ribbon panel says—one could well imagine that for a certain classification for a certain type of waste, you don’t want to have access to it anymore, so that means you could use different sites than Yucca Mountain, such as salt domes. Once you put it in there, the salt oozes around it. These are geologically stable for a 50 to 100 million year time scale. The trouble with those type of places for repositories is you don’t have access to it anymore. But say for certain types of waste you don’t want to have access to it anymore—that’s good. It’s a very natural containment. …whereas there would be other waste where you say it has some inherent value, let’s keep it around for a hundred years, two hundred years, because there’s a high likelihood we’ll come back to it and want to recover that.
“So the real thing is, let’s get some really wise heads together and figure out how you want to deal with the interim and long-term storage. Yucca was supposed to be everything to everybody, and I think, knowing what we know today, there’s going to have to be several regional areas.”

331 Gus  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:36:01pm

re: #328 Varek Raith

Why don’t we reprocess it?

National security, weapons use, etc. It was banned several decades ago.

332 Aceofwhat?  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:36:01pm

re: #308 Obdicut

That is a very, very inadequate statement. What ‘science’ is being sacrificed, exactly?

the metric ton of research which showed that Yucca is/was as good a place as any to store nuclear waste.

but i’m with you on reprocessing…and developing better reactor tech. i was disappointed to see such a small allocation to this field in Obama’s last budget, but at the same time, i doubt that i could look back at Bush’s and see anything better. so i’ve held my tongue on that item, being the sort who at least attempts to battle his inner partisan…

333 brookly red  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:36:29pm

re: #328 Varek Raith

Why don’t we reprocess it?

where do you think 30mm ap rounds come from?

334 insanity police  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:36:44pm

Out for the night. Have a good night everyone.

335 Varek Raith  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:36:59pm

re: #333 brookly red

where do you think 30mm ap rounds come from?

Not from that.
;)

336 albusteve  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:37:17pm

re: #320 Gus 802

Right now nuclear waste is being stored on site. That means the federal government has to pay the nuclear operators because the federal government guaranteed offsite nuclear waste disposal location. This runs into a) law suits and b) final payments all of which total into the billions of dollars. These billions of dollars becomes and additional burden on debt and like all money it requires energy to be created and eventually payed off.

you dollars at work…there is real danger having spent fuel stuffed into drums, piled all over the US….it’s a huge, expensive mess….once again the govt made a promise it cannot deliver

337 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:37:41pm

re: #332 Aceofwhat?

the metric ton of research which showed that Yucca is/was as good a place as any to store nuclear waste.

That’s not true, in terms of accessibility, at any rate.

so i’ve held my tongue on that item, being the sort who at least attempts to battle his inner partisan…

Ace, humility works better when you’re not patting yourself on the back about it.

338 brookly red  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:37:53pm

re: #335 Varek Raith

Not from that.
;)

really?

339 Varek Raith  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:38:30pm

re: #338 brookly red

really?

I don’t think so….
Could be way wrong though.

340 Varek Raith  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:39:58pm

re: #339 Varek Raith

I don’t think so…
Could be way wrong though.

Which I’m sure I am.
Bugger.

341 brookly red  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:40:02pm

re: #339 Varek Raith

I don’t think so…
Could be way wrong though.

OK, so they are made from depleted uranium… and the uranium became depleted how?

342 Gus  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:41:07pm

re: #330 Obdicut

Here’s Stephen Chu being all nuanced and shit:

There was a video with Dr. Holdren on the subject matter post last week. It’s somewhere in the pages.

343 Varek Raith  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:41:12pm
Depleted uranium (DU) is uranium primarily composed of the isotope uranium-238 (U-238). Natural uranium is about 99.27 percent U-238, 0.72 percent U-235, and 0.0055 percent U-234. U-235 is used for fission in nuclear reactors and nuclear weapons. Uranium is enriched in U-235 by separating the isotopes by mass. The byproduct of enrichment, called depleted uranium or DU, contains less than one third as much U-235 and U-234 as natural uranium. The external radiation dose from DU is about 60 percent of that from the same mass of natural uranium.[2] DU is also found in reprocessed spent nuclear reactor fuel, but that kind can be distinguished from DU produced as a byproduct of uranium enrichment by the presence of U-236.[3] In the past, DU has been called Q-metal, depletalloy, and D-38.
344 HoosierHoops  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:41:29pm

re: #328 Varek Raith

Why don’t we reprocess it?

I was a nuke worker for 20 years..It is so much complex than than that..It’s not just depleted pellets…
Every day I wore Anti-C’s and used tools in reactors those had to be put in containers and filled with cement and sealed..Every wrench, every angle grinder, every thing I wore was sealed and buried…
We forget the width and breath of working in reactors…

345 Aceofwhat?  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:42:12pm

re: #323 Varek Raith

Beats me, man!
My mind just thinks, earthquakes+bad stuff in cans+Murphy’s Law=We’re boned.

i don’t think so…but i’m pretty sure there are scientists who weighed in on it. in fact, i may have linked to just such a thing a week or two ago;)

346 Aceofwhat?  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:42:54pm

re: #337 Obdicut

That’s not true, in terms of accessibility, at any rate.

Ace, humility works better when you’re not patting yourself on the back about it.

apparently the lightness in my tone was in a spectrum that you have difficulty seeing…

347 Gus  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:43:37pm

Right here: John Holdren on Nuclear Energy and the Climate Challenge

One caveat though. He does suggest artificially increasing the price of oil in the beginning of his lecture.

348 Varek Raith  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:43:46pm

re: #344 HoosierHoops

I was a nuke worker for 20 years..It is so much complex than than that..It’s not just depleted pellets…
Every day I wore Anti-C’s and used tools in reactors those had to be put in containers and filled with cement and sealed..Every wrench, every angle grinder, every thing I wore was sealed and buried…
We forget the width and breath of working in reactors…

Sounds…
Fun.
As you can tell, I’m far more ignorant on this subject than I though.

349 albusteve  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:43:50pm

re: #346 Aceofwhat?

apparently the lightness in my tone was in a spectrum that you have difficulty seeing…

indeed

350 Aceofwhat?  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:46:52pm

re: #348 Varek Raith

Sounds…
Fun.
As you can tell, I’m far more ignorant on this subject than I though.

did you read my old page on LFTR’s? it hurts to see such promising technology left practically untouched…

351 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:47:28pm

re: #346 Aceofwhat?

apparently the lightness in my tone was in a spectrum that you have difficulty seeing…

It so often is, Ace.

352 Varek Raith  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:47:48pm

re: #350 Aceofwhat?

did you read my old page on LFTR’s? it hurts to see such promising technology left practically untouched…

Bookmarked.

353 Aceofwhat?  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:47:49pm

re: #349 albusteve

indeed

now, now. piling on ≠ light tone…i’m not trying to pick at Obdicut. i forgive him his serious nature, just as he forgives me my poor attempts at humor…

354 Aceofwhat?  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:48:36pm

re: #351 Obdicut

It so often is, Ace.

it would help if i were funnier, i know. but it’s not for lack of effort!

355 brookly red  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:50:30pm

OK, so according to my VM the gf is in on a DWI & wants me to get her out. I am thinking more like good for you honey… am I a bad person?

356 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:50:57pm

re: #350 Aceofwhat?

It’s not being left virtually untouched. However, there isn’t even a credible design for a LTFR yet. I hope there will be. And I do think that we should invest some money into research on them. India is actually pushing ahead strongly with this, which is one of the reasons I’m glad we’ve got a free trade agreement with them.

This may interest you:

declineoftheempire.com

357 Varek Raith  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:51:26pm

re: #355 brookly red

OK, so according to my VM the gf is in on a DWI & wants me to get her out. I am thinking more like good for you honey… am I a bad person?

Bad?
No.
In deep shit when she does get out?
You betcha!
;)

358 Uncle Obdicut  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:51:42pm

re: #353 Aceofwhat?

I don’t have a serious nature, either.

If I did, I wouldn’t be wearing these shoes.

359 brookly red  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 3:53:40pm

re: #357 Varek Raith

Bad?
No.
In deep shit when she does get out?
You betcha!
;)

that is a risk I am willing to take… I am a tolerant person but I have no sympathy for those who drink and drive. none.

360 TedStriker  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 4:12:42pm

re: #359 brookly red

that is a risk I am willing to take… I am a tolerant person but I have no sympathy for those who drink and drive. none.

Sounds like your GF caught a case of the dumbass…

361 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 4:28:39pm

re: #268 SanFranciscoZionist

No, but both of them follow the same basic pattern. Obama is not breaking any new ground in U.S. policy in this area. Which leaves the mystery of why so many people can ‘just feel’ that he’s bad for Israel, who did not have the same feeling about the previous administration.

blind partianship rocks!

362 WINDUPBIRD DISEASE [S.K.U.M.M.]  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 4:32:37pm

re: #218 brookly red

NEW YORK — Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.) told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Wednesday during a meeting in New York that the new GOP majority…

I know many people find it hard to believe, but New York is not an other country. (we just play one on TV)

yes, because that totally invalidates my point that he’s getting in front of world leaders to specifically undermine our government’s foreign policy.

Whoops, it actually doesn’t! Now go get your girlfriend out of jail, sheesh

363 Bob Levin  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 6:25:16pm

re: #163 Cheese Eating Victory Monkey

Israel didn’t officially become an ally of the US until the Nixon administration, as a check on Soviet expansion. Johnson could not commit to Israel’s safety in 1967. Then came Nixon, who does not inspire the warmth of Jewish voters, Ford [a historical placeholder], Carter—no warmth, Reagan, Bush I, and then Bill Clinton. That’s the only Democratic President. However, there were many Democratic Senators who did inspire the confidence of Jewish voters.

I think that Jews tend to recall James Baker when thinking about the first Bush Administration. No love loss there.

364 Bob Levin  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 7:04:45pm

re: #235 insanity police

I was waiting for someone to cite that editorial. It’s an argument that is worth addressing.

The sticking point in the thread seems to be around President Obama’s intentions. However that article focuses on whether the present negotiation strategy is effective, whether the strategy is moving the parties closer to the goal. The article is saying that the present strategies are moving the parties farther away from the goal. This is a reasonable question. There is a long history of Western involvement in the Post WWI Middle East, and much of this involvement can generously be characterized as ‘unwise’.

The US Middle East policy, usually formulated by the State Department, has been consistent over the years—and it has had a rather odd twist (not so odd if you factor in oil). Even though Israel is considered an ally, Israel is to be pressured into making concessions while the PLO, Fatah, is to be given incentives.

Before the 2000 election, the majority of Jews were obviously supportive of Gore. GW Bush reminded folks of GHW Bush, and James Baker. After 9/11, for a brief period of time, President Bush did something that hadn’t been done by the US regarding the Middle East. President Bush removed the distinction between terrorist attacks against Israel and terrorist attacks in the rest of the world. He referred to terrorist attacks against Israel as ‘terrorism’ rather than the ‘cycle of violence’.

However, this was short-lived. Eventually James Baker came back to politics as an adviser, and President GW Bush slowly adopted the Baker mantra of flipping Syria into the Western sphere. This is the point where it’s hard to distinguish between President Bush’s policies and President Obama’s.

365 Mich-again  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 9:22:22pm

I don’t see any problem with a member of Congress reminding anyone/everyone that Congress will serve as a check on the President. Thats what Congress is supposed to do. Does reminding people how the Constitution works really rise to the level of violating the Logan Act?

366 Decider  Sat, Nov 13, 2010 11:56:55pm

Canter may try to be a tea party guy but once his constituents in Northern Virginia get wind of him cutting federal spending to them he will change his turn very quickly.

Any amount of money he saves will go directly to his Defense Contractors in Northern Virginia. That is probably why he made this statement. To make sure they know they will get their billions of dollars.

367 RogueOne  Sun, Nov 14, 2010 5:06:43am

re: #356 Obdicut

It’s not being left virtually untouched. However, there isn’t even a credible design for a LTFR yet. I hope there will be. And I do think that we should invest some money into research on them. India is actually pushing ahead strongly with this, which is one of the reasons I’m glad we’ve got a free trade agreement with them.

I must have missed the FTA signing between India and the U.S. and I can’t seem to find a link to it anywhere. Can you supply one?

368 ihateronpaul  Sun, Nov 14, 2010 6:40:43pm

re: #365 Mich-again

I don’t see any problem with a member of Congress reminding anyone/everyone that Congress will serve as a check on the President. Thats what Congress is supposed to do. Does reminding people how the Constitution works really rise to the level of violating the Logan Act?

You are taking the statement at face value. The whole point of charles’s post is what the implied meaning is, which is that the republican party will gleefully oppose obama on behalf of a foreign entity. If you call that “american values” then you need to get your head checked.


This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
Detroit Local Powers First EV Charging Road in North America The road, about a mile from Local 58's hall, uses rubber-coated copper inductive-charging coils buried under the asphalt that transfer power to a receiver pad attached to a car's underbelly, much like how a phone can be charged wirelessly. ...
Backwoods Sleuth
3 days ago
Views: 189 • Comments: 1 • Rating: 4