Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (353499)	3/15/2010 5:08:45 PM
From: KLP	1 Recommendation Respond to of 794261

Glick: “Given His Pedigree, No One Should Be Surprised Obama Is Stirring Up Crisis With Israel” Monday, March 15, 2010, 6:14 AM Jim Hoft Not everyone was surprised by the Obama Administration’s latest attacks on Israel. Noted anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan appeared on the cover of Obama’s church magazine at least three different times. Jerusalem Post columnist Caroline Glick is not surprised by the latest US crisis with Israel. From her webpage: The Obama administration’s calculated decision to escalate its open attacks against Israel over a routine decision by the Jerusalem Planning and Building Board to approve 1,600 housing units in Ramat Shlomo neighborhood presents Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu with an unenviable task. He has to either relinquish Israel’s sovereignty over its capital by capitulating in the face of the unprecedented American assault, or he can tell Obama and Clinton and their cohorts to go to hell. It is depressing, and let’s face it, a bit scary that the US, which has refused to raise a finger against Iran’s nuclear program or any other rogue action by any other US enemy has decided to go after Israel in this fashion. It is depressing, but not surprising. Anyone who paid the slightest attention to who Barack [short for Barakeh in Arabic] Obama is before he was elected knew full well that this man is an enemy of Israel. He was a member of an ardently anti-Semitic church for more than two decades. His friends ranged from virulently anti-Israel and anti-Jewish like Edward Said, Rashid Khalidi, William Ayres, Jeremiah Wright, Samantha Power and Susan Rice — among others — to radically post-Zionist like Arnie Wolf, Rahm Emmanuel and David Axelrod not to mention Joe Biden. Given his pedigree, no one should have been surprised that Obama has chosen to stir up a crisis in his relations with Israel. Bibi can tell Obama to stick it where the sun don’t shine and rally the Israeli public and Israel’s many friends in America to his side and so make it impossible for Obama to carry on doing this with immunity. Or he can lick Obama’s boots and set the clock ticking faster towards the destruction of this country. What’s it going to be Bibi? Hat Tip Dan Friedman The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) released a statement today urging the Obama Administration to immediately defuse the building tension with Israel. Jennifer Rubin says AIPAC rarely if ever releases statements like this directed at a US Administration. By the way… By an 8 to 1 margin, Americans say the US should side with Israel in its conflict with the Palestinians…. But not Team O. gatewaypundit.firstthings.com

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (353499)	3/16/2010 9:32:05 AM
From: Peter Dierks	2 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 794261

Obama Heads the Most Anti-Israel Administration in U.S. History by Gary Bauer 03/16/2010 Remember, last June, when President Obama told reporters that it was “not productive” for the U.S. to be “meddling” in the affairs of a certain Middle Eastern country? Obama’s diplomatic deference inaugurated six months of silence after Iran’s sham elections. By the time the White House got around to “strongly condemn[ing]” the bloody crackdown against protestors, the nascent “green revolution” was in retreat, and Iran’s maniacal president – Mahmoud Ahmadinejad -- was bragging about how close he was to developing nuclear weapons. Obama is showing he has far fewer reservations about meddling in the domestic affairs of another Middle Eastern country, America’s only democratic ally in the region. With its diplomatic assaults on just about everything the Israeli government does, the Obama administration is establishing itself as the most anti-Israel administration in U.S. history. I have talked to foreign policy experts in Washington, D.C. and Israel today and they are using adjectives like “bizarre,” “inexplicable,” “counterproductive,” and “outrageous” to describe ... Message 26387716

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (353499)	3/18/2010 2:42:58 PM
From: Peter Dierks	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 794261

Obama’s timidity threatens US leadership in the region Michael Young Last Updated: March 17. 2010 9:22PM UAE / March 17. 2010 5:22PM GMT The Harvard historian Niall Ferguson published a provocative essay in the magazine Foreign Affairs recently. His contention was that empires, when they entered a phase of terminal decline, tended to do so rapidly rather than passing through a long itinerary of degradation. If Mr Ferguson is right, his theory raises interesting questions about the power of the United States in the Middle East. Mr Ferguson believes the collapse of the American empire will be provoked by domestic economic and demographic realities. Specifically, the ratio of American retired persons to workers is rising, so that the United States, with an inadequate fiscal system, will sink into an unmanageable cycle of debt as relatively fewer workers support an expanding base of retirees. As Mr Ferguson explained in his book Colossus: The Price of America’s Empire from 2004, the only way for the US to overcome this crisis is through self-defeating policies, namely to vastly increase income and payroll taxes, slash social security benefits by equally dramatic amounts, or to cut discretionary spending to zero. While Mr Ferguson is primarily an economic historian, he is also acutely sensitive to the psychological dimensions of empire. His most quoted line about the US is that it is an empire “with a short attention span”. There is an ethos to empire, he asserts, that is necessary to keep the imperial project running. For Mr Ferguson, the world benefits from an effective liberal empire, as it did during the 19th century when Britain ruled. The US is the natural candidate to play that role today, yet keeps resisting this. As Mr Ferguson lamented in Colossus: “For all its colossal economic, military and cultural power, the United States still looks unlikely to be an effective liberal empire without some profound changes in its economic structure, its social make-up and its political culture.” Segue to the Middle East. To what extent has the Obama administration’s actions in the region confirmed, or contradicted, Mr Ferguson’s observations? There has been a disconcerting feeling since President Barack Obama took office that if the American empire ... Message 26394830