Tag Archives: foreign-policy

Biden’s ‘The View’ Interview Tougher Than Obama’s, But Why?

Although there are few tough interviews on ABC’s “The View” – this was an exception to the rule – Vice President Joe Biden received a surprisingly more serious reception than did President Obama on the daytime celebrity show. He even had a snide remark for Whoopi Goldberg about high taxes for the wealthy. As Newsbusters reported , President Obama’s interview was essentially a rousing festival of praise for the administration and Obama’s family. By contrast, Vice President Biden’s interview, although by no means tough, was missing the slew of softball questions that Obama enjoyed. There were even some awkward exchanges between Biden and co-hosts Barbara Walters and Whoopi Goldberg, on the issues of foreign policy and taxes, respectively. While the show’s hosts continually fawned over President Obama, token conservative co-host Elisabeth Hasselbeck soon brought up Biden’s infamous F-bomb gaffe at the health care bill’s signing. Sherri Shepherd followed up by asking about the administration’s answers for angry Tea Partiers, and Whoopi Goldberg then pressed about the problem of high taxes. Biden quipped, “You have a lot of money, that’s why it bothers you,” before assuring Goldberg that he was kidding. That didn’t suffice for the comedian and actress, who continued to press the issue. “People do assume – they see somebody and say ‘They have a lot of money, so take it from them,'” Goldberg pointed out. “But no one says, ‘Well what are they doing with their money, and how are they working? Are they taking care of their family?'” “If we’re going to start talking about a national sales tax, on top of everything else, what taxes can you guys remove?” and exasperated Goldberg demanded of Biden. “I think that they’re worried, too, about how [their money] is being spent,” Hasselbeck remarked about Americans frustrated with the administration. “I think that’s a main issue, not just how it’s being taxed, but how it’s being spent, and it’s astronomical right now.” Veteran journalist Barbara Walters later pressed the Vice President on foreign policy, resulting in another mildly tense exchange. You can view the questions for President Obama’s interview on “The View” here , and compare it with Vice President Biden’s questions, which are listed below: ABC THE VIEW 8/9/10 11:23 a.m.-11:49 a.m. EDT JOY BEHAR: I was wondering, why did Dick Cheney never want to come on? Was it something I said? … BARBARA WALTERS: Mr. Vice President, you have the second most powerful job in the country, and I’m going to ask you a very simple question that may sound like a very simple question. But most people have no idea what the Vice President does except for ceremonial things. Vice President JOE BIDEN: (Unintelligible) (Laughter) WALTERS: Well, that’s why I asked. You know, you break the tie in the Senate, but do you have any power, I mean, what do you do every day? … ELISABETH HASSELBECK: You mentioned relationship with the President, and it obviously is very good, too. You know, it’s – he’s been in the past talking about words, you know, he’s told us that there are certain words that, as America, we should kind of stay away from. The “War on Terror,” “radical Islam,” etc. You get up there, health care bill signed, and you throw the F-bomb, and I’m thinking “Oh man! That might be one we shouldn’t say, too!” (Laughter) So were you surprised that you got the pass from him on that? (Laughter) BIDEN: I was just thankful my mother couldn’t hear or see it. And it was a little embarrassing. JOY BEHAR: Did you realize there was a microphone? … BEHAR: You know, there seems to be a lack of decorum in politics these days. (Laughter) You know, somebody yells out “You lie!”, another person calls Stupak a “baby killer,” and then there was a thing out of your office, Rahm Emanuel, saying that these liberal guys were a bunch of “retards,” my quotes are there. What is going on? And is it dangerous, and is it different? SHERRI SHEPHERD: Well what about the – you know, we have these Tea Party – the Tea Party people now, they’re protesting big government, health care, uh, spending — WHOOPI GOLDBERG: Taxes – SHEPHERD: And your administration – taxes – is saying that they’re these far right lunatics. I mean, why haven’t you addressed any of their – BIDEN: Well by the way, the President and I haven’t said they’re far right lunatics. Look, I think there’s an awful lot of people out there are frightened and scared. It’s a very difficult time. I travel all over the country, I’ve been in over 60 cities, people have lost their jobs, they’re unsure if they’re going to keep their homes, they’re not sure that the jobs they have they’ll keep, can I get my kid back to college, etc.? And they’re very worried. There’s fringes in every outfit. But the vast majority of these people, I think, are just frustrated. And what they don’t get yet, and I understand it, is they’re going to see that we’ve spent our time cutting taxes. We’ve given the largest tax cut in the history of America to middle class people. We’re actually paying for what we do. GOLDBERG: Okay. I like the idea of that. But when you look at how much taxation is going on in this country, you know, I ‘ve been crutching about this from the beginning. Because I don’t mind paying taxes. BIDEN: You have a lot of money, that’s why it bothers you. (Laughter) I’m joking. (Crosstalk) GOLDBERG: Here’s the interesting thing. You may see somebody, and people do assume – they see somebody and say they have a lot of money, so take it from them. But no one says, well what are they doing with their money, and how are they working? Are they taking care of their family? Are they doing – so now, if we’re going to start talking about a national sales tax, on top of everything else, what taxes can you guys remove? BIDEN: Well by – we aren’t talking about that. WALTERS: The President is. BIDEN: No, the President said he was open to listening about that. Look, we’ve set up a commission, a fiscal commission that is designed bipartisan, that is going to report after November elections back to us to say that “This is what we recommend is how to get control of the long-term deficit. And the President said everything’s on the table, everything’s on the table, from cuts, to even considering revenues. And so look, here’s the deal. The question is nobody likes taxes. Nobody likes paying taxes. And I don’t blame them. The question is, who deserves the biggest break right now?  From 2000-2007, the middle class lost ground in America. They lost ground. For the first time since 1929, you had one percent of the people making 23.5 percent of all the income. GOLDBERG: Then why not hit – and I know this must be crazy – but you know, the communications taxes, you look on the phone bill – we are being taxed within an inch of our butt. Why can’t we get some relief from those folk – people don’t mind paying the federal and the state. HASSELBECK: I think that they’re worried too about how it’s being spent. I think that’s a main issue, not just how it’s being taxed, but how it’s being spent, and it’s astronomical right now. …     BEHAR: Before we go any further, I must ask you – what is the appeal of Sarah Palin, exactly, do you think? … HASSELBECK: Is [Palin] something that the administration’s eyeing in 2-12? Or is she someone that they consider to be a legitimate threat again? … WALTERS: Can I ask some foreign policy questions, okay? While we’re at it? Because there’s some important things. Last week Defense Secretary Robert Gates said the administration does not have an adequate plan to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons. The whole world is worrying about this. Why don’t we have a plan? BIDEN: Barbara, we do have a plan, and look, if, as the secretary said, when that, a reference to that memo was leaked. It was inaccurate, what was said, it does not reflect what the memo said, I’ve read the memo, I know the memo. We have, from the day we – actually before we took office, before we took office, one of the first things we did in putting together our national security team, was come up with a game plan as to how to deal with Iraq’s – I mean Iran’s – effort to get a nuclear weapon. We have clearly known exactly what we were doing, and – WALTERS: Sanctions are not working. BIDEN: No, no, no. Sanctions – WALTERS: But you have China doesn’t want to agree to have sanctions – BIDEN: China will agree to sanctions. There will in fact be – this is the first time the entire world is unified that Iran is out of bounds. You have a – they’re more isolated than they have ever been. They are more isolated with their own people, they are more isolated externally, they are more isolated in the region – WALTERS: So is the next step sanctions? BIDEN: The next step is sanctions. WALTERS: And if they don’t work?          BIDEN: I’m not going to speculate beyond that. It’s not appropriate to do that. … WALTERS: Also the Israelis are debating now whether they should attack themselves, without U.S. permission – attack Iran without U.S. permission. If they decided to do that, what are your thoughts? … HASSELBECK: You know, I was reading, growing up they called you “Joe Impedimenta,” is that correct, because of a stutter that you had? I mean, so many people do struggle with that. Exactly how did you overcome it over the years? … WALTERS: And you still today, you work with the American Institute of Stuttering, I just want to mention that – … SHEPHERD: One thing you’re not embarrassed about, which is so great. You’ve been married for 32 years to your wife Jill. But – I love it, because – you asked Jill five times, five times to marry you. When she said no the other four, what made you keep asking? … WALTERS: Why didn’t [Jill] want you? … HASSELBECK: A lot of people are in love with you, Mr. Vice President. Truly, you’re a pretty cool guy, I have to say. I mean, we don’t sit on the same side of the political aisle, but it’s good to share the sofa!  We’re so thankful that you are here. Thanks to the Vice President, and we’ll be right back.

Go here to see the original:
Biden’s ‘The View’ Interview Tougher Than Obama’s, But Why?

Copenhagen Dashed: AP Reports Lament That Bonn Talks ‘Slip Backward’ and ‘Stumble’

The past week has brought forth a couple of items from the Associated Press’s — and for the most part the establishment press’s — special corner of journalistic unreality. It is an area where human-caused global warming is still a given, and where that the nastiness known as ClimateGate that exposed the entire global warming enterprise as entirely unsupported by verifiable scientific data doesn’t exist. Maybe we should refer to that special corner as “The Climate Zone.” The reports each arrived via AP Writer Arthur Max. Mr. Max and conference attendees at climate negotiations in Bonn shouldn’t be mad about having the opportunity to spend in Germany’s capital city. After all, the temperatures there, based on the current report for Tuesday and plus the three forecasted days in the graphic at the top right (seen currently at Google ), are on track to be virtually identical to the city’s pleasant historical August average highs and lows of 73 and 54 degrees , respectively, for August. But despite the reasonably pleasant atmosphere (yeah, I know temps and climate aren’t the same, so back off already), Mr. Max’s August 6 and August 8 reports tell us that discussions between “rich” and “poor” countries have been quite frosty. Meanwhile, reactions from the the supporters of international statist expansion in the environmental movement who are on hand for the festivities have been quite heated. Overall, everyone, including the clumsy Mr. Max, is making mince meat of President Barack Obama’s claim, occasionally echoed in establishment press outlets at the time, to have accomplished anything meaningful at last December’s Copenhagen conference. First, here are the opening paragraphs from Max’s Friday missive : Climate talks appear to slip backward Global climate talks appeared to have slipped backward after five days of negotiations in Bonn, with rich and poor countries exchanging charges of reneging on agreements they made last year to contain greenhouse gases. Delegates complained that reversals in the talks put negotiations back by a year, even before minimal gains were scored at the Copenhagen summit last December. “It’s a little bit like a broken record,” said European Union negotiator Artur Runge-Metzger. “It’s like a flashback,” agreed Raman Mehta, of the Action Aid environment group. “The discourse is the same level” as before Copenhagen. The sharp divide between rich and poor nations over how best to fight climate change – a clash that crippled the Copenhagen summit – remains, and bodes ill for any deal at the next climate convention in Cancun, Mexico, which begins in November. “At this point, I am very concerned,” said chief U.S. delegate Jonathan Pershing. “Unfortunately, what we have seen over and over this week is that some countries are walking back from progress made in Copenhagen, and what was agreed there.” Fortunately or unfortunately (I’m going with the former), there really wasn’t much that “was agreed there,” despite Pershing’s posing, as Max revealed in his Sunday submission (bold is mine): Analysis: Climate talks stumble from Page 1 The new climate change treaty under negotiation for the past 2 1/2 years begins with a brief document called “A Shared Vision.” The problem is, there isn’t one. The latest round of talks that concluded Friday showed that the 194 negotiating countries have failed to even define a common target or method for curbing greenhouse gases – just one example of the ongoing divide among rich and poor nations. Talks began in 2007, with the aim of wrapping up a deal in Copenhagen last December. But that didn’t happen, despite the presence of 120 heads of state or government. It ended instead with a three-page statement of intentions brokered by President Barack Obama. Though less than expected, the Copenhagen Accord scored some breakthroughs. It boiled down the core elements of a deal to 12 carefully worded paragraphs, and it inscribed hard-fought compromises by the main protagonists, the U.S. and China. Details were to be filled in by the next major conference in Cancun, Mexico, starting in November. But the accord was never formally adopted. … The paper was merely “noted” by the conference, stripping it of any legal force. Now, much of the Copenhagen deal has been thrown open again. As readers can see, Mr. Max couldn’t stay consistent in his musings even in the space of five paragraphs. In the third paragraph above, he notes that a deal “didn’t happen.” But in the seventh, he says that “the Copenhagen deal has been thrown open again,” as if a deal really was done. What transpired in Copenhagen was not a “deal.” If “the paper” had no “legal force” and could only be “‘noted” by the conference,” it really didn’t rise even to the level of what most of us would consider a “memorandum of understanding.” In other words, there really never has been a “deal.” Then again, for journalists in “The Climate Zone” who have had years of practice presumptively insisting that human-caused global warming is settled science, when it’s not — not even the “warming” part, as one leading advocate admitted in one of the ClimateGate e-mails — making the leap from “no deal” to “deal” hardly causes them to break a sweat. Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com .

Read the rest here:
Copenhagen Dashed: AP Reports Lament That Bonn Talks ‘Slip Backward’ and ‘Stumble’

Snooki to President Obama: You’re a Liar!

Snooki is upset with President Obama, and not because of foreign policy, health care reform or even the tanning tax she whined about in the Jersey Shore premiere . She thinks he dissed her on TV. During Obama’s visit to The View , he said he didn’t know who Snooki was. We don’t blame him for trying to dodge that one, but in May, POTUS joked that the Jersey Shore star and her cohorts should be excluded from that very tanning tax. “I know he knows who I am,” Snooki told E! Online this weekend. “Why did he have to lie and say he didn’t know me? He did say Snooki and JWoww about the tanning stuff and now he doesn’t know who I am? He has to stop lying.” Looks like Barack’s down one voter in 2012. KISS OFF : Snooki wants the President to stop the lies . As for New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie slamming the MTV series for tarnishing the Garden’s State’s image, Snooki, who is actually from N.Y. State, simply said, “He needs to come over and have a hot dog and a Corona and just chill.” But not too many Coronas. Otherwise he could end up arrested like Snooki on July 30. “I learned not to drink during the day and save it for the clubs. Have you ever been in jail? It’s not fun. I never want to go there again.” We have, and can vouch for her on that one. Better to wait until at least 4 p.m. before cracking open that first cold one. Maybe she’ll write this newfound wisdom down in one of her new books. Yes, that was books , plural. “One is the Snooktionary with all my sayings,” Snooki said . “The other is the story of somebody going to Seaside Heights and everything that could happen to them.” Could make a nice stocking stuffer, Barack.

See the article here:
Snooki to President Obama: You’re a Liar!

Open Thread: Michelle O’s Lavish Taxpayer Funded Vacation During Recession

For general discussion and debate. Possible talking point: the First Lady is  spending beaucoup bucks on lavish vacations while the country is mired in what her husband calls the worst economic slowdown since the Great Depression! Michelle Obama today faced a fresh wave of attacks over her lavish break in Spain with 40 friends, which could easily cost U.S. taxpayers a staggering £50,000 a day. The First Lady has been lambasted for her extravagance at a time when the economy is still struggling. One blogger went so far as to brand her a modern-day Marie Antoinette. And her critics will be further annoyed when they learn that the president’s wife had a Spanish beach closed off today so that she, her daughter and their entourage could go for a swim. Thoughts? 

See the article here:
Open Thread: Michelle O’s Lavish Taxpayer Funded Vacation During Recession

CNN Features Disabled Iraq War Hero Selflessly Assisting Other Injured Veterans

A lot has been said over the years about how our media ignore heroes returning from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. On Friday, CNN aired an absolutely fabulous piece about Dale Beatty. “In 2004, at the age of 26, Dale’s vehicle hit a land mine in northern Iraq and at that moment, Dale’s life was about to change forever,” said Kyra Phillips on “CNN Newsroom.” “I met Dale when we were partnered together in the Fisher House Golf Tournament. Fisher House provides free lodging for military families receiving treatment for war injuries,” she continued. “And it was then that Dale told me about his charity, Purple Heart Homes. Vets helping vets from every war, from building awareness to building ramps.” Try to watch the following fabulous story without shedding a tear (videos follow with transcript and commentary): KYRA PHILLIPS, ANCHOR: August 7th, 1782, George Washington established the Purple Heart, a badge of military merit declaring, quote, “Let it be known that he who wears the military order of the Purple Heart has given of his blood in the defense of his homeland and shall forever be revered by his fellow countryman.” Now I’d like to introduce you to one such man who not only wears that Purple Heart badge of honor, but Sergeant Dale Beatty lives it. In 2004, at the age of 26, Dale’s vehicle hit a land mine in northern Iraq and at that moment, Dale’s life was about to change forever. I met Dale when we were partnered together in the Fisher House Golf Tournament. Fisher House provides free lodging for military families receiving treatment for war injuries. And it was then that Dale told me about his charity, Purple Heart Homes. Vets helping vets from every war, from building awareness to building ramps. CNN photojournalist Jay McMichaels shows us how Dale Beatty is “Making His Mark.” (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) DALE BEATTY, U.S. ARMY VETERAN & CEO OF PURPLE HEART HOMES: I’m Staff Sergeant Dale Beatty, retired from North Carolina. Playing drums in my band today, Southern Fried. Hopefully we’re going to rock these other bands off the stage. (MUSIC PLAYING) BEATTY: A big part of getting back to living is doing therapy. I had to start playing drums again because I had done that before. (MUSIC PLAYING) BEATTY: Purple Heart Homes is a 501(c)(3) public charity founded by John (INAUDIBLE) and myself. We are 100 percent veteran owned and operated. We’re both combat wounded veterans. Today, we’re out here for a Vietnam veteran, Kevin Smith, who is looking at some decreased mobility in the near future due to injuries received in the line of duty. KEVIN SMITH, VIETNAM VETERAN: I have had 14 surgeries on my right knee with three total knee replacements. I have had eight operations on my elbow with two total elbow replacements. I have had three back operations with steel plates and rods put in my back. BEATTY: And what we’re doing here is building him an accessible ramp and a nice deck where he can get into his house. Coming down from his driveway, he has steps with no handrails, and he’s looking at probably being in a wheelchair very soon. SMITH: I mean, it’s difficult for me to even do yard work. PAUL COCKERHAM, U.S. MARINE VETERAN: When I heard about the project, I asked if anybody had volunteered for the landscaping. The answer was no, so I volunteered. I believe in the mission of Purple Heart Homes, and I just wanted to be a part of it. I’m hoping Purple Heart Homes can gain a foothold and spring good to the wounded veterans. BEATTY: This is probably about I’d say 60 hours of volunteer labor to get us to this point. Why don’t I make it rough on you, give you that one. BEATTY: This will be done today or tomorrow and hopefully we can move inside Mr. Smith’s house where he has even greater need for accessibility with his bathroom. This is my office right here. Steve Jobs would like that, wouldn’t he? But most of our calls are really not veterans looking for something to be done for them but veterans that want to say, “Hey, I want to contribute my time or effort or my business specialty to what you guys are doing.” SMITH: Dale Beatty is a true hero, and to see the sacrifices that he’s made for our country and then turn around and say thank you and to help other people that are not as fortunate as some, it’s overwhelming. (MUSIC PLAYING) (END VIDEOTAPE) PHILLIPS: Now, Dale Beatty joins us live from Charlotte, North Carolina. Good to see you, Dale. BEATTY: Good to see you, Kyra. PHILLIPS: Let’s talk a little about – before we talk a little bit about your organization — your connection to these Korean vets, these Vietnam vets — because when we first met, you talked more about them, and then you talked a lot about the guys in Iraq and the guys coming back from Afghanistan. What is it about the connection you have with these guys? What brings you and these guys together from — because you’re from totally different wars, totally different generations? BEATTY: Well, first of all, it’s really a strong relationship with the military and my family. I have Korean, Vietnam, World War II veterans in my family, and even some from world war I and before. So, it’s really important to me that my children respect that generation of veterans, and we call them the Greatest Generation, World War II. So, it’s just important for me. It’s what our country has been established on. It’s the people who went overseas and fought and came back and built this country to what it is today. PHILLIPS: And can I ask you what you’ve learned from those family members and what you’ve learned from those older vets so when you went over to Iraq, did you remember what they had taught you, told you? What stuck in your heart and your mind as a young soldier? BEATTY: Really as a young soldier I didn’t think about those older guys until I actually went to war. And dealing with what I had to deal with, I look back to what my grandfather dealt with in World War II, and some of the things he told me we never even came close to the hardship he endured. So I guess, really, some of the stories he told me when my guys would start whining in Iraq, I’d say, “Look, my grandpa was gone for four years and he never came home, and here we have Internet. We have nothing to complain about.” That’s the main thing I learned is not to complain. From those guys. PHILLIPS: That’s what’s interesting. I mean, you lost both your legs when that land mine hit your vehicle. Yet you say you have no reason to complain. BEATTY: Well, there’s always somebody worse, and even from the people getting hurt like this for hundreds of years, defending for the same values, defending the freedoms of this nation. You know, here on American soil and overseas. So, it’s a no-brainer. PHILLIPS: Tell me what you need, because we want to get the word out right now about Purple Heart Homes, and we’re going to put up the web site Purple Heart Homes North Carolina. It’s phhnc.org. Tell me what you need. I know you need financial support to keep this going. Do you need volunteers? And also, as we do ask for people to contribute and help build your fund, we saw what you were doing for one Vietnam vet, building that handicapped ramp so he can get in and out ever his house easily and get around his house easily. But tell us what this money will go towards and why you need more support, Dale. BEATTY: Well, we need more support because we’re just — I believe we just really scratched the surface with what the project you saw with Kevin Smith. We have eight more candidates, and not all of them are meeting our criteria for us to help them. So, really if people want to contribute to us in general they can go to our Web site and make a donation. That would be great. Or they can e-mail us if they’re local here and tell us how they want to support, be it through their business that they have or just volunteer labor. That’s really what we need. And also really I want for people — what I need from people is to really think about how much the private sector can do for these veterans who are still out there from Vietnam. The government can’t do everything, and that’s why we created Purple Heart Homes because the private sector and the local communities can take better care of people that are next door and in their own backyards than somebody from 600 miles away. PHILLIPS: Amen. BEATTY: So, we really need people to step up and even if they’re not helping Purple Heart Homes, go shake a veteran’s hand and tell them thank you. PHILLIPS: Well, I tell you what. It was always an honor to shake your hand, not just because you beat me on the golf course, and I was very impressed but you’re a remarkable human being, Dale. BEATTY: Thanks, Kyra. PHILLIPS: Also Southern Pride (sic), your band, maybe somebody — a record producer will spot you guys out and you can cut a CD and put that money toward the organization. BEATTY: And that would be great, too. PHILLIPS: That would be a double whammy. You’re a heck of a drummer. Dale Beatty, great to see you. Have a fabulous weekend. BEATTY: Thank you, Kyra. You too. How marvelous. Brava Kyra, bravo Jay, and God bless you Dale Beatty. 

The rest is here:
CNN Features Disabled Iraq War Hero Selflessly Assisting Other Injured Veterans

Famous Chinese Artist Paints Polluted Waters

Original 12th-century paintings by Ma Yuan (left) and Zhang Hongtu’s contemporary reworkings (right) to show the effects of agricultural pollution (top) and dams (bottom). Images via Foreign Policy . Zhang Hongtu has never shied away from tough subjects. The New York-based Chinese-American artist has used his paintings to tackle Chinese propaganda, consu… Read the full story on TreeHugger

Read more from the original source:
Famous Chinese Artist Paints Polluted Waters

Sarah Palin: ‘You Don’t Wanna Mess With Conservative Women!’

In a new video out today, Conservative bombthrower Sarah Palin sends a warning message to big-government liberals: “You thought pitbulls were tough? Well, you don’t wanna mess with the Mama Grizzlies!” The video celebrating Conservative women’s activism was released by Palin’s political action committee, SarahPAC. “It seems like it’s kind of a mom awakening in the last year and a half,” says Palin, as clips of women activists at political speeches and Tea Party rallies flash over the screen. “Where women are rising up and saying ‘No — we’ve had enough, already.’ Because moms kind of just know when something’s wrong.” The inspiring message in the video contrasts with attacks against Conservative women that are regularly launched by media and political figures on the left. In May, liberal talker Mike Malloy called Rep. Michelle Bachmann, R-Minn., a “phony-ass broad” and a “skank.” Last October, Keith Olbermann referred to Conservative columnist Michelle Malkin as “a mashed-up bag of meat with lipstick on it.” And last September, Ed Schultz dismissed the brilliant attorney and former State Department official Liz Cheney as “daddy’s little girl” — a reference to her father, former Vice President Dick Cheney.

Read more here:
Sarah Palin: ‘You Don’t Wanna Mess With Conservative Women!’

CBS’s Couric to Netanyahu: ‘Should You Be More Strongly Advocating’ on Obama’s Behalf?

In an interview with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Wednesday, CBS Evening News anchor Katie Couric noted President Obama’s unpopularity in Israel and pressed Netanyahu to remedy that fact: “To change public opinion in your country, should you be more strongly advocating on his behalf?” Couric preceded that question by citing a recent poll of Israelis, which she seemed perplexed by: “Can you explain this to me, then? In a poll conducted a month ago – just a month ago – 71 percent of the Jews in Israel surveyed said they dislike President Obama; 47 percent expressed a strong dislike.” Earlier in the interview, Couric tried to gauge Netanyahu’s feelings toward Obama: “Do you trust Barack Obama?…surely there have been disappointments with the Obama administration. Can you just be candid with me and tell me how the administration has disappointed you?” While Couric asked about Israeli “disappointments” with Obama, she never cited any specific Obama administration policies or actions as the cause of those disappointments. On Wednesday’s Good Morning America on ABC, co-host George Stephanopoulos repeatedly badgered Netanyahu on ways to improve the U.S.-Israel relationship, placing no responsibility on President Obama to repair the alliance: “One analyst said, this is a false calm. Suggesting that you can’t or won’t deliver what President Obama is calling for in the peace process. So, what concrete steps are you prepared to take?” Here is a transcript of the first part of Couric’s July 7 interview with Netanyahu: 6:39PM ET KATIE COURIC: In other news, it appeared yesterday that President Obama had accepted an invitation from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to visit Israel. But today the White House said the trip, is, quote, ‘not on the books for this year.’ So have the two leaders really patched up their differences? That was part of the conversation when I interviewed the Prime Minister this afternoon here in New York. Do you trust Barack Obama? NETANYAHU: I trust Barack Obama, the President of the United States, to carry out with me the policies that have joined Israel and the United States in what Barack Obama has called the ‘unbreakable bond.’ We have common goals, common interests, and we now have a job to do to get on with our common goal of achieving peace with security. I trust we’ll be able to do that together. COURIC: While you want to accentuate the positive, clearly – that’s part of your mission here in the United States – surely there have been disappointments with the Obama administration. Can you just be candid with me and tell me how the administration has disappointed you? NETANYAHU: You know, you remind me of the Israeli press. They say ‘how come you had a good meeting with President Obama?’ Well, because I did. Because we actually see eye to eye on some central issues. The quest for peace, the danger of Iran, the need to bolster security for Israel and the region. That’s the truth. We do see it. Have we had differences? Of course we had. But I think some differences- COURIC: Some awkward moments? NETANYAHU: Yes, of course we had. So what? Even they are magnified and distorted. I think the President has a fine mind, and I can relate to it. COURIC: Can you explain this to me, then? In a poll conducted a month ago – just a month ago – 71 percent of the Jews in Israel surveyed said they dislike President Obama; 47 percent expressed a strong dislike. NETANYAHU: Well, maybe they don’t have the opportunity to have the kind of conversations that I had. And maybe they’re not aware, also, of the ongoing cooperation between Israel and the United States in the fields of security, intelligence. The fact that the Iron Dome program to protect against missiles is something that has been bolstered by this administration and by this president. We have a common goal to achieve a secure peace. I’m looking forward to working with him to achieve it. COURIC: Well, to change public opinion in your country, should you be more strongly advocating on his behalf? NETANYAHU: You know, I invited the President to Israel. I hope that he finds an appropriate time to come. I think that when people get to know him, and first lady Michelle Obama was very kind to my wife, they gave us a very warm reception. I hope I’ll be able to – we’ll be able to reciprocate in Israel.      COURIC: And later in this broadcast, what Prime Minister Netanyahu thinks the U.S. and Israel can do to curb Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

The rest is here:
CBS’s Couric to Netanyahu: ‘Should You Be More Strongly Advocating’ on Obama’s Behalf?

MSNBC’s Maddow: U.S. Presence in Afghanistan ‘Inherently Corrupting’

Happy belated birthday, America, your presence in Afghanistan is “inherently corrupting.” That’s the message Rachel Maddow gave on her July 6 program. During the Bush administration, the Left often argued that the president had distracted America by engaging in hostilities in Iraq, bleeding resources and attention away from the real war on terror in Afghanistan, which had harbored al Qaeda pre-9/11. Now with Iraq all but won following the success of the Bush-approved, Petraeus-executed “surge,” the Left is becoming vocal in its opposition to the war in Afghanistan and finding a platform on MSNBC. Daytime network anchor Dylan Ratigan has been calling for withdrawal from Afghanistan for weeks, arguing that the war in Afghanistan has lasted longer than Vietnam and been a needless waste of money. Now Ratigan’s colleague has joined in the chorus. On the Tuesday, July 6 edition of her eponymous show, Maddow made this argument: If they’re still offering that (referring to Taliban) and we’re trying to make an Afghan government that is not corrupt, to be a viable alternative to that, but our very presence by virtue of the fact that we’ve got to spend a ton of money and we’re foreigners and we’ve got to protect ourselves and all this stuff, our influence here, our presence here, is inherently corrupting just because a lot of money flows everywhere we go. 

Here is the original post:
MSNBC’s Maddow: U.S. Presence in Afghanistan ‘Inherently Corrupting’

Petraeus Uses a Word the President Won’t Use to Describe Goal in Afghanistan

The first six words (bolded by me) of Deb Riechmann’s report from Kabul, Afghanistan for the Associated Press are refreshing: “We are in this to win,” Gen. David Petraeus said as he took the reins of an Afghan war effort troubled by waning support, an emboldened enemy, government corruption and a looming commitment to withdraw troops – even with no sign of violence easing. It would have been even more refreshing if Riechmann, who obviously felt compelled to tick off as many of the reasons Petraeus and the troops he leads may not meet the goal as quickly as possible, would have reminded readers that Petraeus’s boss, President Barack Obama, has been decidedly allergic to using the words “win” and “victory” in Afghanistan since his inauguration. One of her later paragraphs presented a perfect opportunity to remind readers of the president’s aversion. She passed; she shouldn’t have. Petraeus, thankfully, feels no need to hold back, as noted later in Reichmann’s report (bolds are mine): … “We are engaged in a contest of wills,” Petraeus said Sunday as he accepted the command of U.S. and NATO forces before several hundred U.S., coalition and Afghan officials who gathered on a grassy area outside NATO headquarters in Kabul. … “In answer, we must demonstrate to the people and to the Taliban that Afghan and international forces are here to safeguard the Afghan people, and that we are in this to win,” Petraeus said on the Fourth of July, U.S. Independence Day. Continual discussion about President Barack Obama’s desire to start withdrawing U.S. forces in July 2011 has blurred the definition of what would constitute victory. That coupled with the abrupt firing of Petraeus’ predecessor, a move that laid bare a rift between civilian and military efforts in the country, has created at least the perception that the NATO mission needs to be righted. … June was the deadliest month for the allied force since the war began, with 102 U.S. and international troops killed. … “After years of war, we have arrived at a critical moment,” Petraeus said. “We must demonstrate to the Afghan people – and to the world – that al-Qaida and its network of extremist allies will not be allowed to once again establish sanctuaries in Afghanistan from which they can launch attacks on the Afghan people and on freedom-loving nations around the world.” Petraeus suggested he would refine – or at least review – the implementation of rules under which NATO soldiers fight, including curbs on the use of airpower and heavy weapons if civilians are at risk, “to determine where refinements might be needed.” In a March 27, 2009 address at the Council on Foreign Relations, President Obama outlined a “Strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan.” The words “win” and “victory” or synonyms of those words do not appear. The closest he got was a promise “to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and to prevent their return to either country in the future.” Later, he said “to the terrorists who oppose us, my message is the same: we will defeat you.” Maybe that suffices for some, but then there was this incident, four months later, as reported by the Associated Press : President Barack Obama says he’s uncomfortable using the word “victory” to describe the United States’ goal in Afghanistan. He says the U.S. fight there is against broader terrorism and not a nation. … When Obama delivered a speech in March about his strategy on Afghanistan and Pakistan, he did not use the word “victory.” Obama spoke with ABC’s “Nightline” while traveling to Ohio and Illinois. A lengthier report at Fox News included this nugget:  “We’re not dealing with nation states at this point. We’re concerned with Al Qaeda and the Taliban, Al Qaeda’s allies,” he (Obama) said. “So when you have a non-state actor, a shadowy operation like Al Qaeda, our goal is to make sure they can’t attack the United States.” The only sure way to “to make sure they can’t attack the United States” is to kill or capture as many of their members as possible until the rest surrender or disband and permanently give up their terrorist ways — in other words, to win (i.e., achieve v-v-v-v … victory in) the unconventional war we are fighting against them. Rhetorical reluctance aside, one can only hope that President Obama will let General Petraeus do what must be done to win, even if he (Obama) will probably never acknowledge it when it occurs — just as he has never acknowledged the victory in Iraq (Petraeus, as shown here , more than likely has). Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com .

Read the rest here:
Petraeus Uses a Word the President Won’t Use to Describe Goal in Afghanistan