Trump Publishes New Details About Retaking the Panama Canal
Post-Assad Syrian Christians Rise Up to Celebrate Christmas
Since When Did We Republicans Start Being Against Punishing Criminals?
Taking Another Look At ‘Die Hard’
Russia Blamed for Devastating Airline Crash That Killed 38 Passengers Near Ukraine
Protecting the Lives of Murderers, but Not Babies
Wishing for Santa-Like Efficiency in the USA
Texas Woman Arrested and Charged After Authorities Made This Horrifying Discovery
Man Arrested for Attempted Murder After Plowing Car Through Group of People on...
Bill Maher: 'This Is What I F***ing Hate About the Left'
Remember the Man Accused of Murdering Four University of Idaho Students? Well...
Russia Launched an ‘Inhumane’ Christmas Day Attack on Ukraine
Celebrating the Miracle of Redemption
A Letter to Jesus
Here's Why Texas AG Ken Paxton Sued the NCAA
Tipsheet

Obama Could Not Be Clearer About His Israel Stance


It says something about Obama's stance that the very statement meant to make his position crystal clear, delivered by his own representative on Jewish issues, is one of the more clumsy, opaque,
Advertisement
convoluted sentences of the entire campaign:
“We’re going to continue to keep making this case with initiatives to make it clear that his support for Israel could not be more unequivocal,” Mr. Wexler said.
Got it. All clear now that I've diagrammed the sentence.

As is the case with all things Obama, I think he's being deliberately vague to allow for maximum interpretations and minimum consequences. This tendency got him into trouble in his interview on Israel with "The Atlantic:"

JG: Do you think that Israel is a drag on America's reputation overseas?

BO: No, no, no. But what I think is that this constant wound, that this constant sore, does infect all of our foreign policy. The lack of a resolution to this problem provides an excuse for anti-American militant jihadists to engage in inexcusable actions, and so we have a national-security interest in solving this, and I also believe that Israel has a security interest in solving this because I believe that the status quo is unsustainable. I am absolutely convinced of that, and some of the tensions that might arise between me and some of the more hawkish elements in the Jewish community in the United States might stem from the fact that I'm not going to blindly adhere to whatever the most hawkish position is just because that's the safest ground politically.

Advertisement
Obama's advisers have since stated that the "wound" of which he speaks is clearly the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and not Israel itself. That interpretation is only marginally better for Obama, in my mind, but the tactic is undoubtedly helpful for him.

Credulous news organizations like the NYT will report that Obama's making all the right moves, and valiantly assuring Jewish voters of his staunchly pro-Israel stance in the face of relentlessly unfair GOP attacks on irrelevant associations and misinterpreted statements.

Gaza phonebankers will assume his outreach is posturing and read the very real signals of his associations, staff, and comments as proof that Gaza GOTV should kick into overdrive.

A deliberately blank canvas makes a dangerous presidential candidate, and the problem with Obama's pro-Israel stance persists-- it's anything but clear.

(You know what? I blame the staff!)

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement