Mitt Romney is already helping Israel. Obama is so desperate to block Romney from getting Jewish votes, and the even greater number of votes from those who support Israel, that Obama is forced to help Israel. It must be killing him.
Barack Obama is worried Jews and supporters of Israel will abandon him with less regard than his father abandoned him. This fear leads Obama enablers to say the irrational – Pelosi: Republican Jews are “being exploited”. Whatever.
Obama started his occupation of the White House by snubbing Israel and vilely twisting history in his Cairo speech. The Obama Cairo speech was parts Völkischer Beobachter, part Jew baiting in distilled form, and part land for peace Sudetenland treachery.
Obama made it worse. In his “Cairo II” speech Obama back-stabbed Israel with a new demand to national suicide. Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu fortunately knew how to fight thugs and rammed the 1967 borders down Obama’s throat.
Jews and supporters of Israel must always remember:
“Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.”
In contrast to treacherous Barack Obama, Mitt Romney is this weekend speaking with Israeli leaders and facing peril and opportunity:
“Romney Faces Perils and Opportunities in Israel
JERUSALEM — Mitt Romney’s visit here this weekend was scheduled around the opening ceremony of the Olympic Games, not the Jewish calendar. But the timing, on the solemn fast day of Tisha B’av, has turned out to be both auspicious and fraught.
The holiday on Saturday evening to Sunday evening commemorating the destruction of the First and Second Jewish Temples of Jerusalem, is somewhat out of tone with campaign events, but provides a compelling backdrop for Mr. Romney’s message about the threats facing Israel. And while some thought he should mine the occasion on Sunday to give a speech at the Western Wall, a crowd magnet during the fast, he instead plans to speak at a conference center overlooking the Old City and probably visit the wall after the fast ends.”
It is Mitt Romney’s fourth visit to Israel. It likely will not be his last. Romney has already promised to make Israel his first overseas trip as president. While in Israel Mitt Romney will not undermine the sleazy Obama but just being in Israel is a sharp critique:
“Officials inside the campaign said Mr. Romney, who has pledged to “do the opposite” of Mr. Obama on all things Israel, would not critique the administration’s policies while here, as he did this week in a fiery speech in Reno, Nev., at the Veterans of Foreign Wars convention. Instead, he plans to speak broadly about the “shared threats, challenges and opportunities” that Israel and the United States face.
“The Tisha B’av holiday is about remembrance,” noted Dan Senor, the Romney adviser who is the architect of the trip. “In reflecting on and remembering the tragedies that the Jewish people and Israel went through, we’re reminded of the challenges and the threats that Israel faces today.” [snip]
“Part of the job in being prime minister in Israel is being able to manage your relationship with the U.S., that’s probably job No. 2,” said Stanley Greenberg, a Democratic pollster who has worked on many left-leaning Israeli campaigns. “His good relationship with Romney probably helps him domestically, probably gives him some leverage in dealing with Obama.”
Bibi knows the problem is Obama. The problem is not Mitt Romney pretending he is a world celebrity willing to bow and bend to whatever potentate or clown constituency demands of him:
“Romney isn’t out to make the world swoon
The itinerary for the overseas trip that Mitt Romney is taking — Britain, Poland and Israel — is brilliantly chosen. These countries contrast greatly with candidate Barack Obama’s 2008 foreign tour, which included stops in Afghanistan and Jordan. That journey aimed to show that he would strengthen America’s bonds with countries that aren’t always our staunchest allies — and that Obama was the opposite of President George W. Bush. Huge crowds swooned over Obama in Paris and Berlin, a reception that was a boon to his campaign at home.
The former Massachusetts governor, however, neither seeks nor generates this sort of delirium. He is a sober man who promises reliable management and a foreign policy that recognizes that the world is beset with dangers to America’s welfare and liberty.
Thanks to Romney’s speech to the Veterans of Foreign Wars convention in Reno, Nev., on Tuesday, we now have the broad outlines of how his foreign policy would differ from Obama’s. There would be a break, the Republican candidate indicated, from policies that have “exposed the military to cuts that no one can justify, compromised our national security secrets and, in dealings with other nations, given trust where it is not earned, insult where it is not deserved and apology where it is not due.”
Romney is an old-fashioned, unstylish man whose views hark back to a time when America was confident in itself and less worried about the judgments of other nations. We have grown anxious in the past decade or so, seeing our country in the mirror held up beyond our shores. There is a yearning for that self-confidence. And Romney promises to call back those older, simpler American verities.
Just as Obama sought to distance himself from Bush’s legacy, Romney’s overseas itinerary is meant to draw a contrast with the current president. Israel, Poland and Britain are resolutely pro-American societies, choices that play it safe politically and suggest that a Romney presidency would as well.
The “special relationship” with Britain calls for no commentary; this is the Anglo-Saxon world, as it was once unapologetically called. [snip]
Israel is of the West but not in it, a besieged democracy. Obama has not visited there since his 2008 trip, and Israelis have wondered about his fidelity to their country.
Poland, too, imparts meaning: Its people have paid dearly for their liberty, daring to defy the Soviet Union and casting their fate with the West. Poland still stands sentry against Russia. And Romney’s previous characterization of Russia as the United States’ “number one geopolitical foe” is music to Polish ears.
And Poland has had its own disappointment with Obama: Bush proposed a missile-defense system to be based in Poland and the Czech Republic. Obama has reconfigured it, proposing a system more acceptable to Russia and, he contends, more effective in warding off potential missile attacks from Iran and North Korea.”
Domestically Barack Obama is a failure. In foreign affairs Barack Obama is a failure:
“In the same vein, candidate Obama vowed to close the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, repair “brand America” abroad, drain anti-Americanism from the Islamic world and build trust between Pakistan and the United States.
But these promises have been largely forgotten in the exercise of power. Guantanamo is still open, and anti-Americanism in the Islamic world did not dissipate when Bush left the White House. In a supreme note of irony, the Pew Global Attitudes Project, which was once held up as proof of Bush’s poor standing in foreign lands, recently bore bad tidings for Obama:
“In a number of strategically important Muslim nations,” the June report says, “America’s image has not improved during the Obama presidency. In fact, America’s already low 2008 ratings have slipped even further in Jordan and Pakistan.”
The Romney campaign is not out to win hearts and minds in Karachi and Cairo; that sort of public diplomacy is of no interest to the candidate and his bid for the presidency.
“I do not view America as just one more point on the strategic map, one more power to be balanced,” Romney said Tuesday, emphasizing American exceptionalism — probably because Obama has often equivocated about it.
“I believe in American exceptionalism,” the president said in France in 2009, “just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism.”
The most generous interpretation is that Barack Obama has not a clue about what the term “American exceptionalism” is about. But more likely Obama simply has contempt for the concept and believes himself so much better than to defend American national interests.
In his own grandiose vision of himself as popular world celebrity Barack Obama has been thwarted by Israel and Netanyahu:
“Under Romney, would there be a difference on the “peace process” between Israel and the Palestinians? The tone might improve, as the bonds between Romney and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu are strong; in contrast, there is an obvious estrangement between Obama and the Israeli leader. But that conflict will not yield to an American president’s power. From Harry Truman till the present, that primordial struggle has frustrated U.S. leaders. No matter how close the U.S.-Israeli relationship is, the United States cannot dictate the terms of an Israeli-Palestinian settlement. Any grand historical accommodation must be the work of the protagonists themselves.
The late Harvard political scientist Samuel P. Huntington once sketched three visions of the United States’ place in the world: nationalist, cosmopolitan and imperial. In the nationalist view, America defends her interests in the world and marks ideological borders and differences with other nations. In the cosmopolitan view, the foreign world and globalization reshape America, erasing the differences that separate it from other countries. In the imperial vision, America remakes the world by remaking foreign lands.
An imperial push can’t be sustained; the United States lacks the resources and the drive for such grand ambitions. So we are down to a more realistic distinction. Obama embodies the cosmopolitan aspiration, and Romney the nationalist idea. We have already seen Obama’s worldview at work; it probably wouldn’t change in a second term. Romney’s stewardship would dawn without trumpets and drums. It would have the sobriety of Gerald Ford’s and George H.W. Bush’s leadership. But there would be an ideological edge, illustrated in Romney’s VFW address: “Like a watchman in the night, we must remain at our post — and keep guard of the freedom that defines and ennobles us and our friends.”
This is not only good prose. Compared with Obama’s ideas, it is a different view of America.
We are loathe to use the term cosmopolitan as it has an historic association with anti-semitism. But we will take it in the spirit in which it is offered. Of more interest to us is the quote from Romney: “Like a watchman in the night, we must remain at our post — and keep guard of the freedom that defines and ennobles us and our friends.”
America as a “watchman in the night” has a long history. Liberal Zechariah Chafee Jr. was fond of the phrase and used it to great effect in The Blessings of Liberty. More recently Senator Marco Rubio denounced declinist Obama and quoted JFK:
“One of my favorite speeches is one that talks about our role in the world. It was the speech President Kennedy was set to give, had he lived just one more day. It would have closed with these words:
“We in this country, in this generation, are- by destiny rather than by choice- the watchmen on the walls of world freedom. We ask, therefore, that we may be worthy of our power and responsibility, that we may exercise our strength with wisdom and restraint, and that we may achieve in our time and for all time the ancient vision of ‘peace on earth, good will toward men.’ That must always be our goal, and the righteousness of our cause must always underlie our strength. For as was written long ago “except the Lord keep the city, the watchman waketh but in vain.”
Almost half a century later America is still the only watchman on that wall of world freedom. And there is still no one else to take our place.
What will the world look like if America declines? Well, today all over the world, people are being forced to accept a familiar lie, that the price for their security is their liberty.
If America declines, who will serve as living proof that liberty, security and prosperity are all possible together? Today, radical political Islam abuses and oppresses women, has no tolerance for other faiths and seeks to impose its views on the whole world. If America declines, who will lead the fight to confront and defeat them?
Today, children are used as soldiers and trafficked as slaves. Dissidents are routinely imprisoned without trial, and subjected to torture, forced confessions and forced labor.
If America declines, who will take these causes as their own? What will the world look like if America declines? Well, who will create the innovations of the 21st century? Who will stretch the limits of human potential and explore the new frontiers?
If America declines, who will do all this, and ask for nothing in return?
Motivated solely by the desire to make the world a better place?
The answer is no one will. There is still no nation or institution in the world willing or able to do what we have done.
Ronald Reagan described America as a shining city on a hill. Now, some say that we can no longer afford the price we must pay to keep America’s light shining. Others say that there are new shining cities that will soon replace us. I say they are both wrong. Yes, the price we will pay to keep America’s light shining is high, but the price we will pay if it stops shining will be even higher.
Yes, there are new nations now emerging with prosperity and influence. And that is what we always wanted. America never wanted to be the only shining city. We wanted our example to inspire the people of the world to build one of their own. You see, these nations, these new shining cities, they can join us, but they can never replace us. Because the light coming from them is but a reflection of our own. It is the light of an American century that now spreads throughout the world. A world that still needs America. A world that still needs our light. A world that still needs another American century.”
On the very first weekend after his election in 2010 Marco Rubio went to Israel. Marco Rubio continued to respect Israel with speech after speech in defense of Israel:
Mitt Romney is in Jerusalem this weekend. Marco Rubio has been campaigning on behalf of Mitt Romney this weekend. Marco Rubio has not only survived an emergency landing of his airplane today. Marco Rubio has also closed the book on bogus ethics charges – Florida to Rubio: About that ethics thing… nevermind
For those speculating about Mitt Romney’s choice for Vice President this weekend the eyes should turn not turn solely to Jerusalem. It’s very possible that Mitt Romney has found a fellow watchman. Next year it just might be Romney/Rubio. Next year might be MR/MR. Next year there might be hope in Israel.