Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
A Study In Contrasts: The Leader of the Free World Visits Washington
In a gesture of class and magnanimity, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu included in his remarks to the American people the following:
We appreciate all that President Obama has done for Israel. … Some of that is widely known, like strengthening security cooperation and intelligence sharing, opposing anti-Israel resolutions in the U.N. … Some of what the President has done for Israel is less well-known. … And some of what the president has done for Israel might never be known, because it touches on some of the most sensitive and strategic issues that arise between an American president and an Israeli prime minister. But I know it, and I will always be grateful to President Obama for that support.
Replying with characteristic haughtiness, President Barack Obama answered:
On the core issue, which is how do we prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, which would make it far more dangerous and would give it scope for even greater action in the region, the prime minister didn’t offer any viable alternatives.
Leave aside, for a moment, Netanyahu’s quite viable alternative of declining to reward Iran’s underwriting of worldwide terrorism with a deal that merely slows its genocidal ambitions (preferring to raise, rather than lower, the price for radical Islamic terrorism), and let us instead focus, for just a moment, on the refreshing candor of a leader who jettisons the Svengali-like semantics that have lulled a significant portion of the American citizenry into a civic stupor, in favor of moral clarity:
Iran’s goons in Gaza, it’s lackeys in Lebanon, its revolutionary guards on the Golan Heights are clutching Israel with three tentacles of terror. Backed by Iran, Assad is slaughtering Syrians. Backed by Iran, Shiite militias are rampaging through Iraq. Backed by Iran, Houthis are seizing control of Yemen, threatening the strategic straits at the mouth of the Red Sea. Along with the Straits of Hormuz, that would give Iran a second choke-point on the world’s oil supply.
Just last week, near Hormuz, Iran carried out a military exercise blowing up a mock U.S. aircraft carrier. That’s just last week, while they’re having nuclear talks with the United States.
The mind reels and wonders at the dimensions of that debauched dignity and depraved self-respect which compels any U.S. administration to enter into any negotiation whatsoever with a semi-savage government that openly mocks us. For a nation obsessed with bullying at home, we positively covet it abroad. How exhilarating it was, then, to divert our attention away from a Secretary of State and President who risk spinal injury from reaching around to place giant “Kick Me” signs on their backs, to hear someone with a spine of steel stand before Congress and summon our better nature:
Ladies and gentlemen, history as placed us at a fateful crossroads. We must now choose between two paths. One path leads to a bad deal that will at best curtail Iran’s nuclear ambitions for a while, but it will inexorably lead to a nuclear-armed Iran whose unbridled aggression will inevitably lead to war.
The second path, however difficult, could lead to a much better deal, that would prevent a nuclear-armed Iran, a nuclearized Middle East and the horrific consequences of both to all of humanity. You don’t have to read Robert Frost to know. You have to live life to know that the difficult path is usually the one less traveled, but it will make all the difference for the future of my country, the security of the Middle East and the peace of the world, the peace, we all desire.
My friends, standing up to Iran is not easy. Standing up to dark and murderous regimes never is.
It wasn’t easy for liberals to hear this, for people who will not fight evil always take exception to people who do. Nancy Pelosi was reportedly so jarred by the unadulterated truth that she got the vapors before announcing that she was, “…saddened by the insult to the intelligence of the United States as part of the P5+1 nations, and saddened by the condescension toward our knowledge of the threat posed by Iran and our broader commitment to preventing nuclear proliferation.”
Which begs the question, if American leadership already understands the magnitude of the “threat posed by Iran” and doesn’t bother to dispute Netanyahu’s account of that threat, why are they intent on pursing a deal which (a) leaves Iran’s nuclear program largely intact, and (b) removes restrictions on that program within ten years? But to raise such questions is insulting, dontcha know, to the intelligence of someone who herself insulted the intelligence of one and all by saying we had to pass that hideous health care bill in order to know what was in it.
The contrast could not have been clearer between a man of action, a combat veteran, and a forceful advocate for peace through strength; and a man of indecision, a community organizer whose weak-kneed approach to the dark forces of radical Islam paralyzes him, rendering his lips incapable of even framing the words, let alone issuing those orders necessary to defeat the enemy. It was a contrast the left didn’t want us to see, for it highlights the yawning divide between a leader of conviction and courage, and a diminutive, self-indulgent little man who views the decapitation of one of his citizens and goes straightaway to a golf course.
It is truly a breathtaking contrast, but what of the disparity between the Israeli Prime Minister and those who invited him to speak before Congress in the first place? Is it a comparison they consciously invited? What does it say about John Boehner that, even while applauding the unflinching courage of Netanyahu, he was preparing to meekly submit, that very day, to the unlawful dictates of the very man whose weakness he sought to highlight?
Radical Islam incapacitates a timid American president who, in turn, incapacitates a timid Republican party, leaving the law-abiding American citizen, who pays the bill for this madness, without any effective representation. It is here that a point of commonality between our two major political parties begins to surface, for it is we the people who are left without a voice in our own affairs, and who must be led about and coerced by our supposed betters in both parties.
We who play by the rules, who work an insane number of hours each week, who are bombarded with more edicts, regulations, restrictions and instructions than we can count, whose health care costs and taxes grow even as our sphere of liberty tightens, have become the common enemy of both parties, one of whom openly lies about us while the other openly lies to us in order gain our votes.
Perhaps then, it was on a deeper level that Netanyahu connected with us. Far from insulting or condescending to us, he spoke the language of truth, even as Winston Churchill, whose likeness Obama evicted from the White House, spoke truth to Great Britain while dark clouds gathered. One had the sense, listening to the Israeli Prime Minister, that American fortitude and liberty was an asset, rather than an impediment, and that the American people were to be admired rather than apologized for. It was not the intelligence of the American people he questioned, but rather, the judgement of a governing class grown aloof and disconnected from those it governs.
As the Republican presidential field takes shape, I’ve not yet decided who I will support. Indeed, after this week’s dismal Republican capitulation, which all but insures the importation and eventual registration of tens of millions of new Democrat voters, I’m not certain that the entire exercise hasn’t been rendered academic. This much I know, however. I will not be condescended to nor lectured to by any candidate who cannot distinguish nativism from the rule of law. I will not support a candidate who bestows great laurels on the head of Hillary Clinton while disparaging the base of his own party, and I won’t be part of a candidate’s “etch-a-sketch” approach to campaigning.
“I want you to know,” Ronald Reagan told the nation in 1992, “that I have always had the highest respect for you, for your common sense and intelligence and for your decency. I have always believed in you and in what you could accomplish for yourselves and for others.” Through its incessant timidity, it’s duplicity and outright lies to those of us whose votes it solicited, today’s Republican party has forfeited all entitlement to my support.
I cling, however thinly, to the hope, however fleeting and unwarranted, that a candidate will sneak through who believes that a government must aspire to be worthy of its citizens, rather than one who believes we the citizens must be made worthy of their government. If the party cannot produce such a candidate, then who am I to fight against the political suicide toward which Republicans have labored with such singular devotion?
Published in General
So in short, words and image, and nothing of substance.
What will “conservatives” do when Netanyahu is voted out of office in Israel, and replaced by a Socialist president? (Israel is a pretty socialist country, in comparison to us)
Everything said here is not only meaningless, but is all long-term trends that started decades ago. Other than posturing and words…Netanyahu has done next to nothing…and he knows why.
Even his own military considers what he says to be nonsense.
Iran is rampaging in Iraq? Hmm…maybe us giving power to the Shiites in Iraq after we overthrew Saddam had something to do with it?
Iranian-backed Houthis in Yemen? Hmm…maybe that has something to do with AQ in Yemen? (who they are fighting)
Iranian backed Hamas in Gaza? Hmm…maybe something to do with Israel pulling out of Gaza after it realized it wasn’t worth controlling?
Oh, and BTW, all stuff that started decades ago. Nothing new here.
So I find it strange that “conservatives” who constantly complain that Obama is just words and no game…find such comfort in someone who is much more “words” than game too. Is words and speeches and posturing what you want? Cause that’s what you’re getting here.
The sad reality is that the Obama government is worthy of the citizens that elected it. There is no knight in shining armor that going to come down from and lead us out of Egypt and back into the promised land. We don’t have a leadership problem, we have an intellectual and moral deficiency problem. In other words, we get the leaders that we deserve.
I have missed you Dave, visit more often would you.
AIG,
You’re a numbers kind of guy. You wouldn’t want to place a little bet on the outcome of the upcoming Israeli election would you?
Regards,
Jim
It is truly a breathtaking contrast, but what of the disparity between the Israeli Prime Minister and those who invited him to speak before Congress in the first place? Is it a comparison they consciously invited? What does it say about John Boehner that, even while applauding the unflinching courage of Netanyahu, he was preparing to meekly submit, that very day, to the unlawful dictates of the very man whose weakness he sought to highlight?
Radical Islam incapacitates a timid American president who, in turn, incapacitates a timid Republican party, leaving the law-abiding American citizen, who pays the bill for this madness, without any effective representation. It is here that a point of commonality between our two major political parties begins to surface, for it is we the people who are left without a voice in our own affairs, and who must be led about and coerced by our supposed betters in both parties.
Thank you for your eloquence, Dave. You’ve expressed so cogently what so many of us are struggling to convey.
And compared to his predecessors….
Did he bring a drawing of a bomb this time? Then he really could have competed with the Iranians in terms of showmanship.
Wait…did he REALLY use the Iranian joke of sinking a barge dressed up as a carrier…as a talking point?
Yeah, you might want to find someone else to hang your hat on.
This is not only a great essay but it leads off with quite possibly the title of the year.
AIG,
Surely you must think that the Israeli public holds the same low opinion. How about that wager then. Maybe I should ask for odds since you think him such a long shot. We could have Rob Long hold the stakes.
Regards,
Jim
Thank you PHCheese. My schedule has been a bit rough of late, but as things settle down, I’ll be around more often. I always enjoy the company here!
Well, John Kerry is busy capitulating to everyone he can find, and Barack Obama is immersed in shredding the separation of powers doctrine. If you find a former Israeli special forces team leader, twice wounded in battle, and currently sounding the alarm about a murderous regime pursuing the means to execute its own vow to destroy Israel unsuitable to the challenge, perhaps you have someone else in mind? Or is Iran really a misunderstood peace partner?
Nice article Dave. It’s good to admire a man with guts instead of our femme dude. AIG, so you’re saying Iran is JV right?
Oh no no. Words and speeches accompanied by drawings of bombs, are really what is going to make a difference here.
http://www.timesofisrael.com/ex-mossad-chief-pm-taking-intolerable-risks-with-israeli-security/
I’m not sure I care what the Israeli public thinks or does. I’m American, not Israeli.
Although, I am looking forward to the 2016 Republican presidential debate, which will likely turn into a similar lane as the 2012 debate where the…prospective leaders of the free world…argued among themselves as to who is Bibi’s biggest lap dog.
“I’m good friends with Bibi!”
“No no. I’m Bibi’s best friend!”
“Oh yeah? Well I lick his…plate every night after he eats!”
Leaders of the free world they were, every last one of them.
You got that from what I said, where? Nevermind. It’s a rhetorical question.
AIG,
Amazing how you hear just what you want to hear. I asked if you would like to bet upon the outcome of the election. You must be willing to risk a little capital on your opinions. How about a nice gentleman’s bet then. You know if you aren’t so sure.
Regards,
Jim
The right words, the right speeches, can rally a nation (see Churchill), so I wouldn’t be too quick to dismiss them. Conversely, words can sometimes amount to little more than ineffective pot shots with no alternatives offered, even when alternatives are requested.
Thanks, Dave for the post. Perhaps one of the reasons our President avoided Mr. N. on his visit was to keep from appearing smaller in contrast.
Rally to what?
AIG,
I see you aren’t leaping to my little wager. I know you aren’t interested in Israeli politics. It’s funny though other Americans seem to be very interested in Israeli politics. I heard through the grape vine that a certain gentleman who has been a very large donor to the Democratic Party has poured $2,000,000.00 into the Israeli opposition to Netanyahu. That’s a lot of money and Israel is a pretty small country. I know this isn’t the first time he’s done this kind of thing to Israel.
Of course, Israelis are clued into the manipulation from America this time mainly by Netanyahu’s speech and the vicious reaction by the administration. I think my big donor is going to lose his $2,000,000.00. Don’t fret about him. He’s got lots more than that.
Now what about you and I. How about a nice $50.00 wager.
Regards,
Jim
Well, the one thing we can take away is that our current leadership is hell bent on making America a weaker, less influential, more European nation. Which is antithetical to the very heart of what America is.
Whether Bibi’s right-on or full of hot air, WE still have huge problems that Washington is not only not addressing but making worse. And I see the problem arising from both parties.
As Ross Perot once said of the Republicans and Democrats, “There’s not a nickle’s worth of difference between ’em.”
I agree with Dave when he says, “As the Republican presidential field takes shape, I’ve not yet decided who I will support. Indeed, after this week’s dismal Republican capitulation, which all but insures the importation and eventual registration of tens of millions of new Democrat voters, I’m not certain that the entire exercise hasn’t been rendered academic. This much I know, however. I will not be condescended to nor lectured to by any candidate who cannot distinguish nativism from the rule of law. I will not support a candidate who bestows great laurels on the head of Hillary Clinton while disparaging the base of his own party, and I won’t be part of a candidate’s “etch-a-sketch” approach to campaigning.“
Republicans can no longer count on my vote.
Jim, somewhere there is a comfy little bridge that is missing its troll.
How lovely. Our very own Rico-troll-mole; nevertheless, it is amusing if not occasionally entertaining.
Huh. Wow. It is stunning that you might have a grasp of Israel’s history or any sense of politic at all and think that a) Netanyahu is the kind of guy that has gotten nothing done (whether you agree with him or not is another story), b) that the speech meant nothing in spite of the way we know how these things shift political opinion and elections (which have played a huge part in the vital support of American for Israel since the beginning…read O Jerusalem if you have any questions about that), and c) that the fact that something has been going on for decades means that talking about how it is playing out now…particularly when he is addressing nuclear developments with a country that seeks to wipe them off the map, renders his speech meaningless? Doesn’t the history render it even more critical?
Whether or not this speech will do so, the fact is that in democracies, speeches change the world, not only when they are first given, but as they resonate out through time. It’s called rhetoric, not the cheap way we use the term now, but in the classic sense where persuasion is considered one of the highest forms of art.
The reason this article is so interesting (and darn well gratifying to read) is that it contrasts the soaring, memorable, and potentially game changing rhetoric of Netanyahu (and the long history he has of being a man who, regardless of what you think of his policies, has shown epic levels of heroism and determination through a long life devoted to his nation) against the vapid, whiny, narcissistic performance of our president whose only virtue (if it can be called that) is his consistency. You can rant all you want, but my bet is that all your words are going to end up on Reagan’s ash heap of history, while Bibi’s are going to be remembered, with great influence, for many decades to come.
Dave, I know I’m late to the party; thanks for highlighting the speech – and pointing up the contrast with the current chief executive – and among the ‘loyal opposition’…Sheesh!
This strikes me as a load of red herring (or is it herrings?).
Yes, speeches are words. Who knew?
The situation we find ourselves in vis-a-vis Iran is really bad for American interests as well as Israeli, but Obama and company don’t seem to realize it. Israel may be the little satan, but don’t forget who the great satan is. Are you (AIG) comfortable with Iran having unlimited nuclear weapons and ICBMs? Are you okay with Iran controlling an ever greater number of countries in such a strategic region?
It’s ahistorical to accuse Netanyahu of being a man of words and posturing only. Here is a list of some military operations he has ordered as prime minister:
I get the impression that you would only consider Netanyahu a man of action if he launched an attack at Iran. But that is what everyone wants to avoid. The question is whether Obama’s approach to “negotiating” with Iran makes such an attack (by the Israelis or the US) more or less likely.
I think it’s obvious that Obama’s pusillanimity in the face of Iranian intransigence is calamitous. Netanyahu is exhorting Obama to grow a pair, to use what leverage the world’s foremost military and economic power has to force a better deal, one that keeps us safer from Iranian megalomania. Don’t relax sanctions, strengthen them. Don’t give in on enrichment, forbid it. Don’t ignore the ICBM program, make ending it an absolute condition.
The alternative to offer them? Permanent exclusion from the world’s economy, financial system, oil markets, etc. Whatever we can do to impoverish them.
Notice that this is something less than war.
Yeah but, did he bring a drawing of a bomb? How are we going to know how close we are to Armageddon if we can’t visualize it?
BTW…you might want to talk to these guys:
http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Former-Israeli-security-commanders-Netanyahu-speech-will-bring-Iran-closer-to-the-bomb-392565
Though, surely, with such a passionate defense of the Heroic Super-Duper Awesome war hero, you truly deserve the title of “Bibi’s best friend”. Hey, maybe you could win the 2016 Republican nomination for that.
1) He’s got no business sticking his nose in American politics. It’s an insult to us as a nation.
2) Israel owes us everything. We owe them nothing. He better play by our rules…not dictate us the rules. Of course, Republicans are joyful because…well…they have no respect for the office of the President unless its their own guy in office, at which point, woe unto thee if you criticize the President!
3) All this “we’re weak” bla bla bla is complete nonsense and not worthy of a response. Repeated for the 600th time on Ricochet, just this week, and yet nothing to back it up.
4) Netanyahu has no interest or intent of going towards peace. He’s done nothing other than antagonize friends and enemies alike. But, that’s his business what he does at home. I could care less.
5) He can’t even convince his own military, his own government, or the Israeli people, to back up his plan.
6) So now he comes over here to ask us to get involved in yet another war in the ME, against yet another country we know nothing about, have no idea what to do about, have no clue what the ramifications are etc etc.
Iraq 2.0?
7) Some “conservatives” just can’t rest until the world burns again. They just can’t. 2 years since the last war? Too long. There’s this strange morbid fascination with starting wars everywhere and against everyone. So, of course, there’s not much to say to those people (i.e. Jim)
8) So he comes here, insulting our nation, insulting our government, insulting the office of our President, acting as if we owe him anything…while the Republican candidates and politicians try to outdo each other as to who can bend over for Bibi the furthest…
Do some of you have any self-respect as Americans? Or is your hate for Obama so strong, that you are willing to cheer and applaud some foreign politician who has done little but insult the image of the US over the years?
I don’t believe I have ever seen such a performance by US citizens, who call themselves patriots that is.
This isn’t an issue about Iran. This is an issue about a foreign politician who insults the US and the office of its leaders.
But hey…you’re not doing anything the Left didn’t do to Bush. So congrats on reaching full Obama Derangement Syndrome.
PS: You know, all these “defenses” of Bibi because he’s a war hero, a strong leader, send his nation into war, dedicated to his nation…bla bla bla…applies to a hell of a lot of world leaders these days. Shirtless Vlad fits the bill. Assad fits the bill.
I.e., all this worshiping of someone because he’s a “strong leader” has a certain funny smell to it. A fascination for “strong leaders” is certainly not something I would consider a…good thing. But hey, with “conservatives” these days, anything is possible! Someone can become the “leader of the free world” by insulting the US, apparently!
I’ll admit that I thoroughly enjoy the comparisons between Bibi, a man, and Barry, who is something much less. That the opinions of so many about Barry are so high says a lot about who those people are, where they came from, and what they care about.
But what bothers me is what appears to almost be an obsession with self-destruction that characterizes much of the Left (I’m currently using my Very Broad Brush here). Barry’s goal seems to be to a) let Iran have the bomb, but b) have it in a very restricted sense, and delayed as long as possible.
I can’t seem to find a reason to allow a country to acquire a weapon that they have promised to use against the West in one way or another – either through a proxy terrorist organization, through its own direct action (probably against the only Western democracy in the Middle East), or through the threat of same.
What’s the upside for Big Boy Pants Barry? He has no election to win. He’s probably more of an anchor on Democrat votes than anything else right now, so that concern for the next elections is likely to be small. At best, we have heightened tensions in a region that is perennially tense, especially around the Strait of Hormuz.
Barry has diminished our defense capabilities significantly, so our abilities to project power are reduced. This emboldens people who tell you, repeatedly, they want your destruction.
So, to net it all out: I don’t see Barry’s upside, unless it’s simply to reduce the American and Western presence in the world. What it doesn’t gain is stability, and it does not gain nor does it increase those ideals he swore to uphold and defend, namely, individual liberties and freedom.
He is diminishing those things every day he is in office. Ask a participant in the Green revolution in 2009 how that’s worked out for him, the shining city on the hill, turning its back on what amounts to just another form of totalitarianism.
That’s not leadership. I’m not even sure it’s cowardice. Perhaps it’s a soft form of treason, in a way. But what I don’t think is that Barry has a coherent foreign policy, I think he reflexively reacts to situations as they arise, and his guiding reflex is that whatever the West wants is inherently bad, so he’s going to do the opposite.
I suspect Barry sleeps a lot better than the rest of us.
Easy there, …you’re in danger of making Nancy Pelosi look coherent.
Snarky joke Dave. But do you have an actual response to his criticisms?
Well, the bulk of his comments were answered by Netanyahu himself in his speech. I could read the speech to him, but I doubt that would help. But here are some thoughts:
1) “He’s got no business sticking his nose in American politics. It’s an insult to us as a nation.” American politicians are in negotiations with a nation that has vowed Israel’s destruction, a nation pursuing the means to make good on that pledge. It is an existential threat to Israel, so that it’s quite disingenuous, under the circumstances to accuse him of sticking his nose in American politics. From the Washington Post back in 2012:
Quite the mindless Obama haters at the Washington Post, no?
2) Israel owes us everything. We owe them nothing. He better play by our rules…not dictate us the rules. Of course, Republicans are joyful because…well…they have no respect for the office of the President unless its their own guy in office, at which point, woe unto thee if you criticize the President! I wasn’t aware that our relationship with a friend was a scorecard, but in any event, no leader should be expected to quietly acquiesce in his country’s destruction. As for Republicans not having respect for the office of President unless it is their guy, ad nauseum, Republican leaders don’t even respect themselves! But they can’t do nearly the damage to the office of the President that the current occupant has already done. Also, I would remind you that many Republicans were very quick to call out George W. Bush on various issues. Remember Harriet Miers? Immigration?
3) All this “we’re weak” bla bla bla is complete nonsense and not worthy of a response. Repeated for the 600th time on Ricochet, just this week, and yet nothing to back it up. I’m afraid AIG is simply impervious on this. Even American military commanders are speaking up about diminishing capabilities, while Islamo-Nazi’s advance, Russia advances on its neighbor, and China arms up. There is such a thing as willful blindness.
4) Netanyahu has no interest or intent of going towards peace. He’s done nothing other than antagonize friends and enemies alike. But, that’s his business what he does at home. I could care less. If you could care less, why bring it up? He has offered to cede land for peace, he has, at times, stood fast and not responded militarily to rocket attacks on his countrymen. He could have leveled his enemies by now, but has chosen not to do so, taking care to minimize civilian casualties even as the enemy hides behind its civilians. Is it his job to sit placidly, and is it the manifest destiny of Jews to simply die, as quietly as possible? If not, what would you have them to in the face of repeated attacks?
5) He can’t even convince his own military, his own government, or the Israeli people, to back up his plan. There will almost never be unanimity with proposed action,..even in military circles. He has his detractors, we have AIG.
6) So now he comes over here to ask us to get involved in yet another war in the ME, against yet another country we know nothing about, have no idea what to do about, have no clue what the ramifications are etc etc. He’s asking us to avert another war. Appeasement doesn’t work, as history has shown repeatedly. If AIG has an alternative plan to deny Iran the bomb, I’d like to hear it. I asked for alternatives last evening, and received gratuitous criticism instead.
7) Some “conservatives” just can’t rest until the world burns again. They just can’t. 2 years since the last war? Too long. There’s this strange morbid fascination with starting wars everywhere and against everyone. So, of course, there’s not much to say to those people (i.e. Jim). And Winston Churchill couldn’t wait to set the world on fire in WWII, right? At what point did self defense become “starting wars?” As a veteran, I have no morbid fascination at all. I dread the ramifications in a very personal way, and I resent the inference that I’m some sort of war monger. But a nuclear armed Iran is simply suicidal.
8) So he comes here, insulting our nation, insulting our government, insulting the office of our President, acting as if we owe him anything…while the Republican candidates and politicians try to outdo each other as to who can bend over for Bibi the furthest… It is apparently the Prime Minister’s job to go home, stay home, and wait for annihilation, yes? He has no role in advocating for his country’s survival, no voice, and no option other than to sit as a spectator, right? What would Prime Minister AIG do? We don’t know. He won’t say.
This isn’t an issue about Iran. This is an issue about a foreign politician who insults the US and the office of its leaders. These words should go on a plaque, to be placed over the smoking hole in the ground in Israel should Netanyahu suddenly follow AIG’s advice and castrate himself.
Now, if you’ll excuse me, I have to go to work. Somebody has to pay for the great ideas that emanate from the penumbra’s of Washington DC.