Smart people are saying that Dennis Ross's departure leaves Barack Obama naked to the Israel lobby. Here is the reasoning: Obama could always say, But I have Dennis Ross working on Middle East policy! He is a Zionist's Zionist, he has said that Israel is always right, he headed an Israeli institute against assimilation. Foxman called this man Israel's "advocate," and Palestinians agreed. Now he is gone! It is the opposite of losing George Mitchell or throwing Rashid Khalidi under the bus in 2008. Those were signals to the lobby that Obama wanted nothing to do with fairness. So Obama has lost political cover with the lobby, and as Elliott Abrams, a smart guy, points out, this will hurt him in the 2012 elections.
Ross’s departure is not a diplomatic problem for the White House; it is instead a problem for the Obama re-election campaign.
For Ross was the only official in whom most American Jewish leaders had confidence. As most of them are Democrats who have long accepted Ross’s faith in the “peace process,” they viewed his role as the assurance that a steady, experienced, pro-Israel hand was on or near the tiller. When the White House did something that clearly harmed U.S.-Israel relations (such as the recent Sarkozy-Obama exchange on how difficult it is to deal with Prime Minister Netanyahu, where Sarkozy called Netanyahu a liar and Obama appeared to agree), or made foolish demands of Israel (such as the 100% construction freeze), and when the tone of the relationship clearly became far worse than it had been under Clinton or Bush, Jewish leaders comforted themselves that Dennis was still there. He was the person to whom they reached out, or who reached out to them and comforted them; he explained that things were not so bad really and that the President really cared about all this and had the warmest concern about Israel.
No one else in this administration can now fill that role, as the President enters an election year with a powerful need to maintain the 78% support he had last time in the Jewish community.
...The dates the Quartet has suggested for the Israelis and Palestinians to move forward–territorial proposals in January, and a final agreement by the end of 2012–seem designed to get everyone through the Christmas/New Year’s holidays and the round of 2012 elections.
I don’t know why Mr. Ross is leaving and leaving now, but with the diplomatic situation that grim, who can blame him? And who can blame him if he has tired of being the facade of wonderful Obama-Israel relations behind which the actual political and diplomatic relationship steadily became colder and more distant.
Again: this is the reason that Obama kept Stuart Levey on, a high Treasury official dedicated to serving Israel's interests against Iran, on from the Bush administration. Levey was known inside the lobby to be a Zionist, a former student of Marty Peretz who had written about the Zionist dream. Obama was signalling that he was cognizant of this interest. Now Levey is gone, too.
I happen to think this explanation makes the most sense — Israel and Israel’s allies want to punish Obama for not being even more vocal in his capitulation to the lobby.
Though, you know, it’s hard to overlook the fact that… he’s black, and his detractors in this are pretty much all white.
call me pessocynic — I think Ross’s mission is accomplished.
Where is Stuart Levey?
When are folks going to understand in very real terms that people like Ross and Levey — and Levey’s substitute at Treasury, Daniel Cohen — and the legions on US Congressional staffs/consultancies/think tanks DO NOT WORK FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE US. They are enemies inside the US system, more insidious than STUXNET in Iran. Why would anybody think that an entity that would subvert a former friend and ally, Iran, as Israel did and was, would not similarly subvert and betray the United States?
Agree. And our Reps take an oath statng that they will protect the US constitution from enemies within and without. Oops that would mean most of them would have to exit.
RE: “Israel and Israel’s allies want to punish Obama for not being even more vocal in his capitulation to the lobby.” ~ Chaos4700
MY REPLY: Yes, one of Elliott “Convicted Liar” Abrams’ primary objectives is to convince American Jews to vote for right-wing Republicans rather than moderate Democrats. Remember that Norman Podhoretz is his wife’s stepfather!
SEE: Inside CUFI’s 2011 Washington ‘Summit’, Special to JewsOnFirst.org, 07/29/11.
Our eyewitness report on Christians United For Israel’s annual Washington conference.
ENTIRE REPORT – link to jewsonfirst.org.
What’s 78% of 2%? I guess in this case it rounds to just the 1%.
It’s all about the donations from the 2%. But I believe Obama’s already pumping the well of Wall Street swag, with the implicit promise of TARP II banker bailouts when the Eurozone utterly implodes. Just watch.
I have forgotten the exact amount but read yesterday in Bloomberg I think it was, that Obama had ‘already’ collected more (or almost more) money for his re election than he raised in his first election.
He doubt he going to be hurting for money…WS has already kicked in a huge amount for Obama.
Yep the money.
I dont think there is a true accounting of how many Jews have shifted the last five years. The hundreds of thousands if not millions of non Jews who have been pissed off about the disproportionate amount of power that the I lobby holds over foreign policy and how this has undermined US National security for decades have been looking for this split for years and years. If the Jewish vote tips the scale Romney’s way they will not be able to pull this off in the dark this time if at all. The scale is tipping and Obama and team know this.
Good riddance Ross. Maybe Mitchell will come back on board.
The reality is different. Christian Zionists are more than 1% of the electorate. Also, in the US support for Israel is, while cracking, truly impressive.
To tie this in with your previous comment – the lobby is effectively working, along with the Republican Party to produce what looks to me like a classic fascist state. (link to w3.salemstate.edu)
In some ways, I believe that the issue isn’t Zionism at all in the US elections. The fight is about the political future of the US and what type of political system the US will have. Zionism is a symbol of that alternative future, the best wedge issue of that system.
Obama, in this sense, has already provided his adversaries key victories as you note. In fact, no matter what Obama does, it will never be enough because he is not a true believer. In this, by trying to placate the opposition, I think he has erred greatly.
I think everyone would do well ,when estimating the power of any special interest group’s vote, to remember that 45% of all voters in the last Presidential election were registered as unaffiliated. They are the vast ‘disgusted with both parties, including the Tea party and disgusted with all the niches.’
The unaffiliated and the uptick in black voters swung the vote for Obama in 2008.
That 45% is going to for ‘the least crazy”…..which as wishy washy as Obama is he comes no where as close to crazy as the crop of lunatics in the republican presidential stable.
if anyone has 45 min to spend watching Bruce bueno de Mesquita and Alastair Smith discuss their book, “The Dictator’s Handbook,” I recommend it.
starting from the core notion that ALL politicians and leaders of every kind work to further their INDIVIDUAL SELF INTEREST — not national self interest; that doing so requires outside support ; that such self-interested leaders seek to keep their support group as small as possible.
Dictators set up an ideal situation — they control finances and the use of violence, and play those factors off against each other. But democracies are not that much different, in spite of the theoretical fact that a voting public can remove a leader who offends the voters.
Smith and bueno de Mesquita explain that in the US electoral system, it takes only a relative few to elect a president, about 35 million out of a population of 300 million, but if the candidate counts electoral college votes accurately, he/she can win with far fewer popular votes. Thus, a self-interested candidate chooses his voters, and not the other way around.
de Mesquita elaborated on how that process works w regard to congressmen: noting that congress is the most unpopular body in the United States, de M says, “How is it that most congressmen are re-elected, usually quite easily?” The answer is, once again, that congressional candidates chose their voters using an array of tactics involving gerrymandering and tailoring policy proposals to the money interests that will pay the most for their perquisites. Once again, candidates choose their voters and not the other way around.
Ron Paul’s message is reaching more and more people, and he may even gain broad popular support, but he has not cornered those few key “voters,” the influence-peddlars, like AIPAC and other enforcers and money-men. AIPAC has become a dual-use political force: it can both enforce/bring down violence on a candidate that does not toe the line, and provide financing; AIPAC has turned the US electoral system into a dictatorship that it sponsors.
Regarding the futility of popular appeal, Michael Mandelbaum (who recently co-authored a book w/Thomas Friedman), director at Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS), commenting on the aroused Arab public, observed that [paraphrasing] foreign policy leaders were not that concerned with the activities of masses of populations, since they had influence over the leaders of those populations. In other words, US could act as the dictator’s handler, to use the dictator to support US ‘self interest.’
The bottom line is, as Chris Hedges said in a powerful speech for Bethlehem Neighbors for Peace at Troy, NY, voting is not the answer; supporting this party as against that party is not the answer. The entire system has been corrupted.
executive summary: we’re screwed
Well, I’ve long known voting isn’t the answer.
That just leaves rebellion. Which as we have seen means violence because the gov will use violence to put down any threat to the system.
Personally I have come to favor some targeted assassinations as an alternative to full out revolution.
“Also, in the US support for Israel is, while cracking, truly impressive. ”
I imagine, even with Americans being in the dark about most things I/P, if the pollsters asked:
Do you support America giving Israel 3 billion dollars in aid. Something like 77% to 99% would say no.
Same goes for a question like…Do you believe American should defend Israel at all cost including going to war with its enemies…
The only Americans who agree to that would be dual citizen Israelis or end of the world fundamentalist….there aren’t as a % of 300 million many of them.
The majority of Americans don’t ‘support’ Israel…they know nothing of it…they think of it as a country with quasi European type people…like us!…who are fighting the Arabs…like us. There is something about the Holocaust and the Bible in there that make them seem peaceful and familiar…
but do Americans really understand whats at stake when our leaders pledge allegiance to Israel…given the choice would they want any money or US solidgers sent to the ME to support Israel? I don’t think so.
The Christian zionists wouldn’t vote for a muslim anyway. I agree with most of what you wrote though, zionism is the model of the future US for the Republican party, and Obama already handed his “adverseries” key victories on that front.
What’s 78% of 2%? I guess in this case it rounds to just the 1%.
ahhh, i’m really not following your math or how you can measure the lobby influence in percentages like this.
also, elliot’s premise of keeping 78% of the jewish vote is wrong and really not what’s relevant because it’s only the few who can rally large donations who make a difference. the vote itself from such a small demographic is not really what is important.
it’s campaign donations.
Not just donations from Jewish donors either, as edwin mentions there are also the Christian Zionists.
…an election year with a powerful need to maintain the 78% support he had last time in the Jewish community
This is a ruse by Abrams because 78% sounds like a big number. In reality Obama will likely get over 70% of the ‘support he had last time in the Jewish community’ due to American Jews voting mostly democratically.
…an election year with a strong need to maintain the Zionist donations he had last time from the powerful and wealthy Israel-supporting community
fixed
do christian zionists donate to democrats? the rest of your comment i agree completely.
Was I being a little too obtuse, maybe? I meant as opposed to the 99%…
If Obama loses a very large amount of Zionist campaign money, threatening he can kiss 2012 goodbye, then he can turn up the fire under Israel (MIC allowing, assuming MIC does not contribute compensating finance). Why not? and would he? Sure. He’d be angry and have nothing to lose.
AIPAC knows this. so it must not cut off funds to that point. My prediction is that it will not cut of funding significantly, adn for exactly this reason. It cannot afford Obama as a loose canon even for one year. However, timing matters. Quid-pro-quo money might be promised for late delivery and then not delivered.
If there is a way to “watch” AIPAC contributions in real-time, I’d be watching.
if anyone has 45 min to spend watching Bruce bueno de Mesquita and Alastair Smith discuss their book, “The Dictator’s Handbook,” I recommend it.
starting from the core notion that ALL politicians and leaders of every kind work to further their INDIVIDUAL SELF INTEREST — not national self interest; that doing so requires outside support ; that such self-interested leaders seek to keep its support group as small as possible.
Dictators set up an ideal situation — they control finances and the use of violence, and play those factors off against each other. But democracies are not that much different, in spite of the theoretical fact that a voting public can remove a leader who offends the voters.
Smith and bueno de Mesquita explain that in the US electoral system, it takes only a relative few to elect a president, about 35 million out of a population of 300 million, but if the candidate counts electoral college votes accurately, he/she can win with far fewer popular votes. Thus, a self-interested candidate chooses his voters, and not the other way around.
de Mesquita elaborated on how that process works w regard to congressmen: noting that congress is the most unpopular body in the United States, de M says, “How is it that most congressmen are re-elected, usually quite easily?” The answer is, once again, that congressional candidates chose their voters using an array of tactics involving gerrymandering and tailoring policy proposals to the money interests that will pay the most for their perquisites. Once again, candidates choose their voters and not the other way around.
Ron Paul’s message is reaching more and more people, and he may even gain broad popular support, but he has not cornered those few key “voters,” the influence-peddlars, like AIPAC and other enforcers and money-men. AIPAC has become a dual-use political force: it can both enforce/bring down violence on a candidate that does not toe the line, and provide financing; AIPAC has turned the US electoral system into a dictatorship that it sponsors.
Regarding the futility of popular appeal, Michael Mandelbaum (who recently co-authored a book w/Thomas Friedman), director at Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS), commenting on the aroused Arab public, observed that [paraphrasing] foreign policy leaders were not that concerned with the activities of masses of populations, since they had influence over the leaders of those populations. In other words, US could act as the dictator’s handler, to use the dictator to support US ‘self interest.’
The bottom line is, as Chris Hedges said in a powerful speech for Bethlehem Neighbors for Peace at Troy, NY, voting is not the answer; supporting this party as against that party is not the answer. The entire system has been corrupted.
Of course it is antisemitic to accuse Israel and Jewish Zionists of manipulating the US political system.
“Of course it is antisemitic to accuse Israel and Jewish Zionists of manipulating the US political system.”
Well, it could be, but isn’t necessarily so. If they actually are doing it, there is nothing hateful about pointing it out. (I’m not saying they are or they’re not, mind you. Just making an overly pedantic point about the statement.)
Guardian reader editor
For antisemitism can be subtle as well as obvious. Three times in the last nine months I have upheld complaints against language within articles that I agreed could be read as antisemitic. The words were replaced and the articles footnoted to reflect the fact. These included references to Israel/US “global domination” and the term “slavish” to describe the US relationship with Israel; and, in an article on a lost tribe of Mallorcan Jews, what I regarded as a gratuitous reference to “the island’s wealthier families”.
I think, Woody, that when all of this come out into the open it is not going to be good for the Jewish community . And slurs of antisemitism won’t save the situation.
“These included references to Israel/US “global domination” and the term “slavish” to describe the US relationship with Israel; and, in an article on a lost tribe of Mallorcan Jews, what I regarded as a gratuitous reference to “the island’s wealthier families”.
There is always a tipping point in censorship among the public.
The press can self censor all they want but people do eventually see the utter ridiculousness. As it stands now, the zios want absolutely nothing said about them or the Jews unless it’s about the holocaust or how Jews are smarter and more moral than others and no one can talk about Jews being rich or using their money in politics except Jews.
It’s obvious in the Guardian statement that enough of the public isn’t playing by the zio rules any longer.
i wonder for how much longer the pressure will work
I think the UN vote will expose the light to a lot of people.
link to guardian.co.uk
Deborah Orr guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 26 October 2011 20.30 BST Article history Last week, I upset a lot of people by suggesting Zionists saw themselves as “chosen”. My words were badly chosen and poorly used, and I’m sorry for it. But accusations of antisemitism have also been intemperate. One can accept the right of Israel to exist, while still believing that the manner in which the nation was created – against the wishes of many of the people already living there, hundreds of thousands of whom became refugees – was problematic and made a contribution to Israel’s subsequent and terrible troubles. (This, in turn, does not imply that the violence against Israel has been either justified or deserved. It has done the Palestinian cause much damage, and rightly so.)
Nevertheless, it would be absurd to believe that Jewish people are any more or less capable of making geo-political miscalculations than anybody else, or any more or less likely to be called to account for them. Evidence from every corner of the world, throughout the ages, attests to the fact that such behaviour is all too typical of humans, as is reluctance to accept that such actions are bound to have their critics.
The high point of background Jewish political power and influence
link to guardian.co.uk
“The UN security council on Friday put off a decision on admitting Palestine as a state while the Palestinian leadership considers whether to press for a vote it is all but certain to lose.
The UN went through the ritual of adopting a confidential report from the admissions committee – which is the security council in another guise – that was unable to reach a common position on whether to recognise a Palestinian state in the face of strong US opposition.”
The US will veto. Portugal and Bosnia have been bought by the Lobby . The UK and France abstain.
“Of course it is antisemitic to accuse Israel and Jewish Zionists of manipulating the US political system.”
No it isn’t.
That is what Israel and the zios are actually doing.
The truth isn’t anti semitic.
And if the zio attack dogs want to call it anti semitic, so what?…let them, who cares.
“The truth isn’t anti semitic.’
Yes it is.
So is reality.
Anything which does not follow the Hasbara line is ipso facto
anti-Semitic.
That word has lost whatever it’s original intended meaning was supposed to be due to misuse and crying wolf. ex – Ben Stein calling Ron Paul antisemitic for saying we (the US) are occupiers:
link to youtube.com
I don’t know how a US military occupation can be antisemitic, Ben Stein seems to think it does. Perhaps he knows something?
I disagree. The people who would turn away from Obama over Ross have already long since turned, or were never his to begin with.
I too agree. Abrams is wishing hard Obama is gone come November 2012. And as for this characters supposed intelligence he was a key player in the most disastrous presidential administration in US history.
And all those who have “…long since turned, or were never his to begin with…” are concentrated in the Republican party, which is in turmoil between nominating a lunatic from a host of maniacs, or a lackluster establishment candidate like Romney from a shrunken ‘country club’ faction.
The economy “stupid” will play a role, but it has consistently hurt Obama far less than it hurts Republicans or the Congress. Nor can any valid lessons be drawn from the multitude of analysis’s of the 2010 mid-term elections. There was bound to be a big correction after the lopsided electoral win by Obama in 2008, besides the opportunity it provided voters to generally register their discontent over the economy.
Unless the repubs can field a viable candidate and quick, they are likely stuck with losing brands Obama has consistently beat to annihilating in polling, regardless of popularity or job approval ratings. Though the 6 November next poll on election day is the only poll that counts, my hunch is that Abrams is going to be eating crow and whining to high heaven for the rest of his life.
I think this is a brilliant strategy by Barry and the O’s – he is gonna force the Israel firster’s to “take to the streets” – and what the American people are gonna find are a bunch of privileged urbanites clamoring for ethnic-privilege in a country thousands of miles away. This is a losing battle for the Lobby.
O.K. DGB, so how do you want the 2% Jewish voters in the US referred to?
Probably “Leftist” “Self-haters” because most of them traditionally vote democratically.
Bush I, Ford, Carter, now Obama. The only presidents in the post-war period who were restricted to one term were those who were declared an “enemy of the Jewish people.”
Bush Sr., Ford, and Carter are reflected upon as lousy presidents too. If Obama is a one termer he will be lumped into that category.
Bush Sr. was an awful president, but at least he acknowledged the problem of Congress (which I don’t think Ford was aware of and ultimately sealed his fate when trying to re-assess the relations) and the Zionist lobby publicly and also argued with Israel’s former terrorist PM about loan guarantees. Carter is often considered one of the worst presidents but IMO he has made up for this with his post-presidency (which is among the best of any former president).
Clinton’s ‘peace process’ should have made him a declared ‘enemy of the Jewish* people’ but because it only served to extend the status quo and create more settlements, I have a feeling it was a Zionist invention.
* – Zionist Israel supporters irrespective of religion or ethnicity
NO NO NO… Not a single one of you has a hint as to what is really going on. Net and the Zionists have suddenly reaslized , all is about to go down the toilet for…and with….them..
Zionists do not trust O for a second term. Get that in your heads. Zionists absolutely don’t trust him. They have a very very good reason.
Why? Why, when he’s bent over backwards trying harder and harder trying to appease Netanyahu, but to no avail?
Here’s why and this is what has Netanyahu and the Zionists scared to death.
Obama may turn 180 degrees against Neyanyahu and the Zionists the second he’s reelected. He certainly should considering the way they have treated him (I’d give it a 70/30 chance)(nah…it’s another 99% to 1% thingy).’
Got that?….the total refutation of Netanyahu and the Zs has them scared to death so they are going to go fully hard out against Obama from now to election time. Ross’ resignation (the axe?) is just the first salvo. All Zionist guns will be spewing unrelenting venom against Obama from now till Nov election night.
Net and the Z’s MUST defeat Obama. They have been treating him so savagely….. so now they will reap the harvest of their harassment if they don’t defeat him.
Jews everywhere will be under greater and greater pressure to abandon Obama. The tribe knits closer and closer the greater the threat. Therefore they will be told it’s the next Holocaust for sure and I’m afraid they will follow the Zionists and completely abandon Obama.
That, dear friends is what is really going on…. Prepare for pounding from now to election.
I trust Obama for a second term.
Richard Witty November 11, 2011 at 2:05 pm – “I trust Obama for a second term.”
Given how he’s turned a blind eye to every Israeli atrocity and illegal act committed since he was elected, I seriously doubt that this comes as any sort of a surprise to anyone. To be honest though, witty saying “I trust Obama” is as negative an endorsement as humanly possible, IMHO
Obama will raise money (already has), and will acquire enthusiastic campaign support, and will get similar super-majority of votes, from Jews, from Zionists.
Not from anti-Zionists though. Why should he then listen to those that snipe at him?
Why wouldn’t he listen to the majority liberal Zionists (majority of Jews), that respect him?
Yeah, why should Obama listen to Americans who are too poor to buy political influence? It’s not like we’re supposed to be a democracy, or anything like that.
Like I said, he’s got 1% of the vote, at least.
“Not a single one of you has a hint…”
Whence this exclusive insight?
Part of me thinks that Obama is playing an IRL version of chess. Having Clinton as a SOS has always been an odd move. Re-hiring Samantha Power after what she said about her was also odd (few years back, Power famously discussed hypothetical military intervention to solve I/P)
Some (but not all) of his Ziocon underlings have been slowly replaced. Rahm Emanuel was forced to resign.
Obama has Palestinian friends back in Chicago. I have a feeling he was much more serious about peace than Bush or Clinton but didn’t know what he was up against. His recent UN speech was odd after his ME and Cairo ones but there is no way he agreed or believed the words coming from his mouth. There was a reason he did this outside of pleasing the lobby or scolding the Palestinians.
The mic thing was probably deliberate. He hasn’t even apologized for it which is odd. The NYT outed Dennis Ross earlier this year, Mitchell resigns and is replaced by Ross, now Ross ‘resigns’. This is a deliberate sequence of events.
Perhaps he is choosing his moves carefully and buying his time until a second term. Neocon hawks aside, I doubt Obama has any interest in striking Iran. Saying ‘we are concerned’ and re-affirming commitment is supposed to make the Ziocons feel all warm and fuzzy but I would like to believe behind the scenes they are doing everything to prevent even Israel from striking it. Re-affirming commitment to Israel does not make him a Zionist shill. Israel needs to be saved from itself, their leaders are destroying it and their citizens fail to see this.
The man is shackled and his window of opportunity may have already passed. But yeah, the Zionists and the lobby have turned their back on him. If he wins a second term he might just do the same. Or he really is Obummer and this is wishful thinking.
Do you ever wonder how much of this “liberal” versus”right-wing” Jewish mud-slinging–mostly within the (2%) tribe (although that’s not ultimately wise as what Jewish media & focused big money do effects the larger Gentile population too & history shows they eventually quit sleeping, i.e., get facts & quit dreaming of heaven)–is just Jew X thinks the lesson of the Holocaust was might makes right versus Jew Y who think the lesson is Never Again has universal application, or it has, deductively, none? A view of humanity as basically evil or a view of humanity as basically good? Goering or Chaney v Rosseau or Whitman? Netanyahu V Buber? Hobbes v……?
This guy seems to have posited all the reasons for Ross’s departure now–how would you prioritize the mix?
link to arabist.net
“…Jewish-American electorate which remains pretty Democratic and mostly concerned about other issues than Israel…”
Not so true in Florida. Development down there will be interesting!
Debbie “DNC” Wasserman-Schultz will have to work overtime.
2011 Annual Survey of American Jewish Opinion
link to ajc.org
“…800 respondents were interviewed by telephone between September 6 -21, 2011…”
6. If the 2012 election for president were being held today, whom would you vote for from among the following choices?
a. Barack Obama is the Democratic candidate and Mitt Romney is the Republican candidate? Barack Obama, Mitt Romney, or neither?
Obama = 50%
Romney = 32%
Neither = 16%
Don’t Know/Not Sure = 2%
b. Barack Obama is the Democratic candidate and Rick Perry is the Republican candidate? Barack Obama, Rick Perry, or neither?
Obama = 55%
Perry = 25%!!!
Neither = 18%
Don’t Know/Not Sure 2%
c. Short version: AJC telephone Jews like Perry more than Bachmann.
18. If diplomacy and sanctions fail, would you support or oppose the United States taking military action against Iran to prevent it from developing nuclear weapons?
Support= 56
Oppose = 38
Not sure= 6
19. If diplomacy and sanctions fail, would you support or oppose Israel taking military action against Iran to prevent it from developing nuclear weapons?
Support = 68
Oppose = 26
Not sure = 6
23. In politics as of today, do you consider yourself a Republican, a Democrat, or an Independent? [Interesting!]
Republican = 16
Democrat = 45
Independent = 38
Not sure = 2
That’s Felonious Elliott Abrams who admitted his guilt by accepting the pardon.
It’s PR.
Ross, Netanyahu’s mouthpiece, doesn’t want to be in the WH? He doesn’t want to be picked up by car every morning, and have 100% access to the President? Gimme a break.
“Elliott Abrams, a smart guy,” I beg to differ. Abrams is a manipulative dangerous criminal
“or made foolish demands of Israel (such as the 100% construction freeze), ” Not foolish at all. He demanded that Israel abide by international agreements. Not foolish at all. This said a great deal to millions of us about Obama and to the rest of the world. Now his bank for re-election may be effected…but Abrams is not calculating the monumental shift in the Jewish community and how millions of non Jews have been acting (writing and petitioning Reps etc) on this issue for decades. Now with the shift in the Jewish community, the Muslim vote Obama can make up the votes. The money issues and whether the I lobby will attack the less educated with lies about this critical issue will be an issue. But the I lobby will not be able to do this undercover in this election. The scale is being tipped. And some Jews in this country and some Israeli’s are not getting that Obama is one of their best friends at this time. They can not put this genie back in the bottle. It is only going to get worse for Israel if they do not start abiding by international laws. They are backing themselves into a corner.
Abrams “The former pattern of acquaintances has not enabled Ross to get anywhere in the Middle East due mostly to errors made by President Obama and his initial Middle East envoy George Mitchell.”
Abrams blaming everyone else but Ross. I had read that Mitchell and Ross were never speaking. That Mitchell felt that Ross was undermining every line they were trying to draw.
Freeze all illegal settlement construction. What a concept!
So now Ross has taken his “Israel’s lawyer” marbles to:
“Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), an Israel-centred think tank that was spun off in 1985 from the powerful lobby group, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Ross served as WINEP’s counselor and a fellow during the George W. Bush administration from 2001 to 2009.”