Obama fumbles on two fronts -- national and world

[mhgaffney]

In the last few days Obama has flubbed two major opportunities to be a leader -- of our nation -- and the world.

1. instead of joining the world and supporting the UN Security Council resolution condemning Israel's illegal settlements -- on Friday the US (Obama) vetoed the latest resolution.

I will post a piece on this by Israeli peace activist Gideon Levy, who says Obama has joined Likud, Israel's extreme right wing.

2. Obama could have traveled to Madison, WI to support the teachers and working people who elected him in 2008. Instead, he shows his allegiance is to Wall Street.

Let's start with this issue:

Obama to Teachers: "Drop Dead"

By Mike Whitney

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article27536.htm

February 21, 2011 "Information Clearing House" ---Teachers. These are the people who put Obama in office. They handed out the pamphlets, went from door to door, stuffed the envelopes, and manned the phone banks. They buttonholed people outside grocery stores, waved posters atop freeway overpasses, and organized neighborhood get-togethers. They spread the word, attended the rallies and drew whatever they could from their meager paychecks to support the man who promised change and inspired hope. They did everything a candidate could ask of his supporters and more. And what have they gotten in return? A bigger war in Afghanistan, a renewal of the Patriot Act, a porno-scanning system at the airports, more blank checks for Wall Street, and a lot of empty posturing about Guantanamo.

And when their pay and pensions and their jobs were on the line, Obama was no where to be found. Poof! The vanishing president.

Name one thing that Obama has done for working people?
Health care? That fetid trillion dollar giveaway to big pharma?
That just doesn't cut it.

Obama has called for a spending freeze government workers pay for the next 5 years while renewing the $700 billion Bush tax cuts at the same time. That's a feat that even Reagan couldn't have managed without igniting a revolt in the ranks. But smooth-talking Obama pulled it off without a hitch. In fact, his devotees are more ga-ga over him than ever.

Two weeks ago, Obama wrote an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal promising to reduce "burdensome" regulations for his friends in big finance. He figured that the trillions they'd already been given wasn't quite enough to keep them happy, so he decided he'd find more rules that he could eliminate.

Then he slithered over to the Chamber of Commerce to assure them that he'd do whatever he could to "change the tone" at the White House to help them increase profitability. Just days later, Obama delivered an entirely different message to striking Wisconsin teachers. He told them that everyone would have to "make sacrifices" to make up for state budget shortfalls. Everyone except his rich friends, that is.

Recently, Obama appointed bank tycoon William Daley as his new chief of staff, and GE's "outsourcing" Jeffrey Immelt to lead his new jobs creation program. Then he finished off the month by throwing his support behind the latest labor-crushing free trade bill, this time with South Korea. According to the Oakland Business Journal: "The proposed trade deal with South Korea would cost 159,000 U.S. jobs over seven years and hurt some of the highest paying industries in the U.S., including motor vehicles and parts, electronics equipment and metal products, according to the Economic Policy Institute." Big labor is against the bill. Obama is for it. What a surprise.

Obama's new budget calls for big cuts to government subsidies for home heating oil for needy families, but allocates $5 million to anti-Chavez groups in Venezuela via the State Department. What makes this so ironic, is that Hugo Chavez has been providing hundreds of thousands of gallons of free heating oil to needy American families across the US. So, while the president of Venezuela is trying to make sure that poor people in America don't freeze to death in the dark, Obama is doing whatever he can to make sure that they do.

Obama has abandoned any effort to reduce unemployment, lower tuition costs, increase welfare, minimize foreclosures, or decrease homelessness. If you are part of the growing number of working-poor in America, don't except help from the Obama team. You're outta luck.

This is from the World Socialist Web Site:

"Two and half years since the eruption of the financial crisis, more than 26 million workers cannot find a full-time job. State governments, under both Democrats and Republicans, are responding to budget deficits by closing schools, libraries, clinics and other public facilities, and carrying out attacks on state and municipal employees.

Meanwhile, Wall Street share values have fully recovered since the crash of 2008 and the corporations and their top executives are richer than ever. President Obama has refused to provide a penny of relief to workers losing their jobs, homes and life savings. Instead he has outlined plans to slash a trillion dollars from vitally needed social services, to pay for the bailout of Wall Street, the extension of the Bush era tax cuts for the rich and the Pentagon war machine. And this is only the beginning....

(In Wisconsin) workers are fighting for their very livelihoods. They cannot live with what amounts to a 20 percent pay cut and devastating cuts in public education and state universities for their children." ("The struggle of Wisconsin workers enters a new stage", World Socialist Web Site)

The strike has entered its second week and still no sign of Obama. Thousands of workers and students from across the state have braved the freezing temperatures and joined in the demonstrations while closing down much of the school system.

The entire country is watching. Many people are wondering how the GOP crackdown will affect their own jobs. They're worried about their future and the future of the country.

Obama could simply fly into Madison, deliver a few words of support for the strikers, and assure himself of a landslide victory in 2012. But he won't do that, because he's not the man that people thought he was. He won't lift a finger to help his friends even when they're embroiled in the biggest fight of their lives. He won't support the people who supported him.

Obama's message to the teachers, "Drop dead!"

[mhgaffney]

This just ran in Ha'aretz.

Be sure to read the last two paragraphs.

With settlement resolution veto, Obama has joined Likud

An America that understands that the settlements are the obstacle should have joined in condemning them.

By Gideon Levy

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/with-settlement-resolution-veto-obama-has-joined-likud-1.344502

This weekend, a new member enrolled in Likud - and not just in the ruling party, but in its most hawkish wing. Located somewhere between Tzipi Hotovely and Danny Danon, U.S. President Barack Obama bypassed Dan Meridor and Michael Eitan on the right and weakened their position.

The first veto cast by the United States during Obama's term, a veto he promised in vain not to use as his predecessors did, was a veto against the chance and promise of change, a veto against hope. This is a veto that is not friendly to Israel; it supports the settlers and the Israeli right, and them alone.

The excuses of the American ambassador to the UN won't help, and neither will the words of thanks from the Prime Minister's Office: This is a step that is nothing less than hostile to Israel. America, which Israel depends on more than ever, said yes to settlements. That is the one and only meaning of its decision, and in so doing, it supported the enterprise most damaging to Israel.

Moreover, it did so at a time when winds of change are blowing in the Middle East. A promise of change was heard from America, but instead, it continued with its automatic responses and its blind support of Israel's settlement building. This is not an America that will be able to change its standing among the peoples of the region. And Israel, an international pariah, once again found itself supported only by America.

This should have disturbed every Israeli. Is that what we are? Alone and condemned? And all for the continuation of that worthless enterprise? Is it really worth the price? To hell with the UN and the whole world is against us?

We can't wrap ourselves in this hollow iron dome forever. We must open our eyes and understand that if no country, aside from weakening America, supports this caprice of ours, then something fundamental is wrong here.

Israel, which is condemned by the entire world but continues merrily on its way, is a country that is losing its connection to reality. It is also a country that will ultimately find itself left entirely to its fate. That is why America's decision harmed Israel's interests: It continued to blind and stupefy Israel into thinking it can go on this way forever.

A friendly U.S., concerned for Israel's fate, should have said no. An America that understands that the settlements are the obstacle should have joined in condemning them. A superpower that wants to make peace, at a time when Arab peoples are rising up against their regimes and against the U.S. and Israel, should have understood that it must change the old, bad rules of the game of blanket support for the ally addicted to its settlements.

A friendly America should have mobilized to wean Israel of its addiction Only it can do so, and it should have started, belatedly, at the Security Council on Friday.

But promises of change and of real concern for Israel are one thing, and diplomatic behavior is another: another automatic veto, as if nothing has changed. Obama or George W. Bush, there's no difference. When Ambassador Susan Rice said that the draft resolution risked hardening the positions of both sides and could encourage the parties to refrain from negotiations, she misled. She knows that what prevents negotiations and hardens positions is continued building in the settlements.

And when the Israeli Foreign Ministry said it is "peculiar that the Security Council should choose to consider one single aspect" of Israeli-Palestinian negotiations "while ignoring the wider scope of events in our region," it, too, misled. Do the Foreign Ministry's spokesmen really believe there is a serious party that would agree to Israel creating irreversible facts on the ground without let or hindrance?

And to call this "one single aspect?" Perhaps it is only one, but it is certainly the most destructive. And thus it is the one the world sought to condemn - and rightly so.

Moreover, this veto was not cast during ordinary days. These are days of boiling lava in the region. If there were a responsible government in Israel, it would have stopped settlement building long ago - not only to deflect fire from Israel, but to promote an agreement that has never been more vital for it.

If the U.S. had been a responsible superpower, it would have voted for the resolution on Friday to rouse Israel from its dangerous sleep. Instead, we got a hostile veto from Washington, shouts of joy from Jerusalem and a party that will end very badly for both.

[sirhcyennek81]

Considering the violence in Egypt, Iran and Libya and government abuses of the Egyptian, Iranian and Libyan people you still find it necessary to condemn Israel. I am not surprised.

Further, I am even more surprised that you give credence to the UN who has condemned NK, Syria and Libya just ONCE each for human rights abuses but has signaled out Israel 15 + times. Do you not see the disconnect?

:Broncos:

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Quotes
<big>
"Since the Republican caucus has taken over the majority, they haven’t put one jobs bill on. They haven’t done a poor job - they haven’t done anything. These cuts are Republican answers for a job crisis that they created….with their massive tax cuts
to the rich, two wars, and big pharma giveaways.

-- Rep Keith Ellison (D-MN) not a "regular" Democrat - he fights back </big><big> </big><big>Link</big> (http://thinkprogress.org/2011/02/16/no-jobs-agenda/)<big>


</big><big> "If we had more Democrats like Ellison, then Obama and the DINOs would not have abandoned Main Street for Wall Street... and the Democrats would still be in the majority in the House. Meanwhile, Obama's budget is almost as far right as Boehner's.
Obama (DINO) is a corporate tool pretending to be a Democrat! The evidence is overwhelming!”

- Kevin Schmidt, </big><big> </big><big>Link</big> (http://thinkprogress.org/2011/02/16/no-jobs-agenda/)

[W*GS]

Remember, folks, in gaffe-land, the only good Jew is a dead Jew.

[mhgaffney]

Considering the violence in Egypt, Iran and Libya and government abuses of the Egyptian, Iranian and Libyan people you still find it necessary to condemn Israel. I am not surprised.

Further, I am even more surprised that you give credence to the UN who has condemned NK, Syria and Libya just ONCE each for human rights abuses but has signaled out Israel 15 + times. Do you not see the disconnect?

:Broncos:

The disconnect is between your ears.

This is the whole world talking. As I pointed out before - there is a consensus on this issue -- with the exception of Israel and its protector -- the US.

The whole world agrees that Israel's occupation of the West Bank is illegal. The whole world agrees that the settlements are illegal. Every judge on the international court agrees that the settlements are illegal -- including the US judge.

In fact US official policy is in accord with the world. US officials are in the strange position of agreeing with the world in principle -- and opposing the settlements in principle -- but in practice the US vetoes the world, anyway. It's a wacko policy.

When you get down to it -- bone headed ignorant people like YOU are the problem. The disconnect is between your ears.

You and the lunatic Christians like Epic who have no clue what Jesus taught -- yet want to push their shallow narrow version of Christianity on others.

Justice is with the Palestinians.

[mhgaffney]

Remember, folks, in gaffe-land, the only good Jew is a dead Jew.

W*gs,

During the American revolution, when our forefathers fought against King George (and the bank of England) -- do you think they worried about whether the bankers in England were Jews or gentiles?

Of course not. The issue was oppression and injustice -- and whether King George's bankers were Jews or not did not matter in the slightest.

This issue of anti semiticism you raise is a red herring -- a classic smoke screen -- the sole purpose of which is to manipulate through fear.

You are a tool -- a shill -- for the very forces that melted down the US and world economy. Congratulations.

[sirhcyennek81]

The disconnect is between your ears.

This is the whole world talking. As I pointed out before - there is a consensus on this issue -- with the exception of Israel and its protector -- the US.

The whole world agrees that Israel's occupation of the West Bank is illegal. The whole world agrees that the settlements are illegal. Every judge on the international court agrees that the settlements are illegal -- including the US judge.

In fact US official policy is in accord with the world. US officials are in the strange position of agreeing with the world in principle -- and opposing the settlements in principle -- but in practice the US vetoes the world, anyway. It's a wacko policy.

When you get down to it -- bone headed ignorant people like YOU are the problem. The disconnect is between your ears.

You and the lunatic Christians like Epic who have no clue what Jesus taught -- yet want to push their shallow narrow version of Christianity on others.

Justice is with the Palestinians.


I could care less what the world thinks, and good job sidestepping the issue. North Korea is starving its people, Libya and Iran are firing on their protesters. Not a peep at the UN. Israel builds settlements but that is somehow worse.

But you support the UN, that had the Sudan on the human rights commission, so I am not surprised.

You are a joke.

:Broncos:

[Rohirrim]

Obama has become a full service sell-out. He sells out the poor by cutting funding to home heating programs in the middle of a horrible winter. He blocks legislation that would have stopped Monsanto from spreading its Frankenstein alfalfa all over the country. His support for the unions that got him elected against a full frontal assault from the Right Wing is anemic. He blocks the UN from voting against settlement building in Israel. His support for democratic revolution in the Arab world is so tepid as to be unnoticed. He is about as pathetic an excuse for a president as I've ever seen.

[Garcia Bronco]

Obama has become a full service sell-out. He sells out the poor by cutting funding to home heating programs in the middle of a horrible winter. He blocks legislation that would have stopped Monsanto from spreading its Frankenstein alfalfa all over the country. His support for the unions that got him elected against a full frontal assault from the Right Wing is anemic. He blocks the UN from voting against settlement building in Israel. His support for democratic revolution in the Arab world is so tepid as to be unnoticed. He is about as pathetic an excuse for a president as I've ever seen.

ha...you voted for him. I think he becomes a better President everyday. I don't care for his administration though.

[Rohirrim]

ha...you voted for him. I think he becomes a better President everyday. I don't care for his administration though.

And as bad as Obama is, he's nowhere close to the disaster Bush was, who I'm sure you voted for. Twice. At least I won't make the mistake of voting for Obama again. That's the difference between me and the average right wing toady. I learn from my mistakes.

[TonyR]

In the last few days Obama has flubbed two major opportunities to be a leader -- of our nation -- and the world.

1. instead of joining the world and supporting the UN Security Council resolution condemning Israel's illegal settlements -- on Friday the US (Obama) vetoed the latest resolution.

I will post a piece on this by Israeli peace activist Gideon Levy, who says Obama has joined Likud, Israel's extreme right wing.

2. Obama could have traveled to Madison, WI to support the teachers and working people who elected him in 2008. Instead, he shows his allegiance is to Wall Street.


The funny thing here is that all the resident righties agree with Obama on both counts. And yet I'm sure very few of them will be starting threads praising him for these actions.

[TonyR]

ha...you voted for him.

What was the alternative? Anybody who voted for a ticket that included Sarah Palin, as if McCain wasn't bad enough on his own, should have their voting privileges permanently revoked.

[Garcia Bronco]

And as bad as Obama is, he's nowhere close to the disaster Bush was, who I'm sure you voted for. Twice. At least I won't make the mistake of voting for Obama again. That's the difference between me and the average right wing toady. I learn from my mistakes.

Time will tell.

I voted for Al Gore and then voted for Bush in his second election.

and if you learned from mistakes...you wouldn't have voted for Carter..I mean Obama in the first place.

[Garcia Bronco]

What was the alternative? Anybody who voted for a ticket that included Sarah Palin, as if McCain wasn't bad enough on his own, should have their voting privileges permanently revoked.

You could have voted like me...for Bob Barr. :P

Now you know how I felt when I had to decide between Bush and Kerry.

[sirhcyennek81]

Time will tell.

I voted for Al Gore and then voted for Bush in his second election.

and if you learned from mistakes...you wouldn't have voted for Carter..I mean Obama in the first place.


ROFL!


:Broncos:

[epicSocialism4tw]

Obama cant win for losing.

The far left was sold on the idea of Obama, because he was as radical as they are. But there's no way that he can get away with being that radical in a position where he's supposed to be a leader for all. The radical far left would prefer a civil war to compromising with conservatives. This is an incredibly naive (not to mention evil) perspective to have.

And Obama is way too far left to win over conservatives.

He's toast unless he decides to abandon the far left completely, which he is not doing.

[Rohirrim]

Obama cant win for losing.

The far left was sold on the idea of Obama, because he was as radical as they are. But there's no way that he can get away with being that radical in a position where he's supposed to be a leader for all. The radical far left would prefer a civil war to compromising with conservatives. This is an incredibly naive (not to mention evil) perspective to have.

And Obama is way too far left to win over conservatives.

He's toast unless he decides to abandon the far left completely, which he is not doing.

It's actually kind of pathetic to see you regurgitate the divorced-from-reality Fox babble in post after post.

[TonyR]

Obama cant win for losing.


How are his two actions in the OP "radical"? And how could they be any more right wing? What you should learn from this thread, if nothing else, is that in reality Obama is nothing close to what Fox News and right wing radio are telling you he is.

[epicSocialism4tw]

It's actually kind of pathetic to see you regurgitate the divorced-from-reality Fox babble in post after post.

It hurts you because its too close to home, you know...you being a far leftist who wants a civil war and all.

[Rohirrim]

It hurts you because its too close to home, you know...you being a far leftist who wants a civil war and all.

Perhaps you could list all the "radical far left" bills Obama has passed?

[epicSocialism4tw]

Perhaps you could list all the "radical far left" bills Obama has passed?

Did you miss Obamacare?

[TonyR]

Did you miss Obamacare?

Then I guess Mitt Romney is a radical too!!!

[Rohirrim]

Did you miss Obamacare?

The Obama health care plan (I assume that's what you are referring to) is nearly identical to Bob Dole's health care plan. It is also far less "radical left" then the plan Nixon put forward in the 70s. Fact.

Keep sucking up the Fox spew. It just makes you stupider and stupider.

[epicSocialism4tw]

The Obama health care plan (I assume that's what you are referring to) is nearly identical to Bob Dole's health care plan. It is also far less "radical left" then the plan Nixon put forward in the 70s. Fact.

Keep sucking up the Fox spew. It just makes you stupider and stupider.

I guess that you assumed that I liked Dole and/or Nixon's plan.

Get your partisan fingers out of your ears.

[cutthemdown]

Then I guess Mitt Romney is a radical too!!!

I think Repubs would say at least it was on the state level. Easier to leave a state that passes laws you don't want to follow. Thats why we have states rights so we can all decide certain things for ourselves.

[Rohirrim]

I guess that you assumed that I liked Dole and/or Nixon's plan.

Get your partisan fingers out of your ears.

No. The issue was that Obama's health care plan was "radical far left" policy. Actually, now that I think about it. Given your positions lately, perhaps you really do consider Dole and Nixon lefties. Ha!

Some of you guys have gone so far out on the Right fringe that old Adolph himself is sitting there going, "Chill, dudes."

[epicSocialism4tw]

No. The issue was that Obama's health care plan was "radical far left" policy. Actually, now that I think about it. Given your positions lately, perhaps you really do consider Dole and Nixon lefties. Ha!

Some of you guys have gone so far out on the Right fringe that old Adolph himself is sitting there going, "Chill, dudes."

Obamacare certainly is far left.

Especially considering that only far left loons want it.

[Rohirrim]

Obamacare certainly is far left.

Especially considering that only far left loons want it.

Actually, the lefties just wanted Medicare for everybody. Obama shut that option down before the argument even started.

[mhgaffney]

Obama cant win for losing.

The far left was sold on the idea of Obama, because he was as radical as they are. But there's no way that he can get away with being that radical in a position where he's supposed to be a leader for all. The radical far left would prefer a civil war to compromising with conservatives. This is an incredibly naive (not to mention evil) perspective to have.

And Obama is way too far left to win over conservatives.

He's toast unless he decides to abandon the far left completely, which he is not doing.

Obama radical?

Now I know you are on drugs.

[mhgaffney]

Obamacare certainly is far left.

Especially considering that only far left loons want it.

In Epic parlance, "far left loons" = the people

[mhgaffney]

The funny thing here is that all the resident righties agree with Obama on both counts. And yet I'm sure very few of them will be starting threads praising him for these actions.

Yeah - ain't it a shame.

We will probably go from the frying pan -- into the fires of hell.