How the Likud’s Agenda Alienates Americans (utter nonsense!)

[Utter nonsense]

By Jeffry Goldberg, The Atlantic

A very smart bit of analysis from Blake Hounshell:

Sullivan’s criticism of Israel ought to worry defenders of the Jewish state, then, because he is a bellwether for a broader shift in American media and society that has happened over the last few years. Israel is using up a lot of the goodwill it had built up in the 1990s, when eminent statesmen like Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres made good-faith efforts toward peace with the Palestinians. Since then, the country has been governed by a series of unimaginative right-wing leaders who have pandered constantly to their settler base and chosen to solve political problems through the use of force. Benjamin Netanyahu and his Likud Party may have their fingers on the pulse of their public right now, but their agenda is not one that appeals to most Americans, who strongly support Israel’s right to exist but have little interest in underwriting the permanent occupation of the West Bank.

I don’t think Andrew is necessarily a bellwether on this — he’s a bit too mercurial — but as a general proposition I think Hounshell has it right. It seems as if many people in the American elite have decided that Israel is just as dysfunctional (and, sometimes, as brutal) as its Arab foes. Americans don’t like intractable crises, and the Israeli government needs to understand this (it needs to understand, as well, that young American Jews are less likely to be reflexive defenders of Israel than their parents are). At the risk of repeating myself (unavoidable on a blog, I guess), it will be risky for Israel to pull out its settlements from the West Bank, but it will be fatal for Israel to remain in the settlements, for moral and demographic reasons.

What Israel needs is a leader who will step forward and say, “Here is the way things should look,” and then present an outline for the creation of a viable Palestine. The settlers will go nuts, but that’s what they do. Hamas will go nuts, because that’s what it does. But Hounshell is right: What is needed is a Rabin. I tend to think that Netanyahu has the potential to be this leader. Maybe it’s more a hope than a reality at this point, but only someone from the right can bring the majority of Israelis to the painful compromises that are obviously necessary. And, to make the obvious point, one of the reasons this compromise is necessary is because American public opinion is one of Israel’s most important battlegrounds.

Note: The problem I see is that Israel does not get a true picture of the American public's opinion. They read what is in most of American newspapers - listen to America's media - and this gives Israel a false picture of how American patriots' feel about President Obama's agenda! Israel THINKS that the majority of Americans support Obama, and this is WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!

Israel needs to stop listening to America's press/media coverage and begin listening to their own hearts and minds; do what is right for their country without seeking an American President's approval - because this President's approval rating is on the downward path within America, becuase we DO NOT agree with his policies for America!! And that goes for his foreign policies that undermine our allies!

Israel, please begin listening to your own citizens, first; and then, listen to the heart of America - a heart that Obama does not have - as a matter of fact, if a physician were to give Obama a checkup, they would find him a man without a heart! BeeSting

Voters to Obama and Congress: Stop!

Jennifer Rubin - 02.10.2010 - 9:42 AM

Summing up its latest poll results, the Washington Post reports:

The survey paints a portrait of a restless and dissatisfied electorate at the beginning of a critical election year. More than seven in 10 Americans disapprove of the job Congress is doing, and as many say they’re inclined to look for new congressional representation as said so in 1994 and 2006, the last times that control of Congress shifted.

Asked how they would vote in the November House elections, Americans split evenly — 46 percent siding with the Democrats, 46 percent with the Republicans. As recently as four months ago, Democrats held a 51 to 39 percent advantage on this question.

(Other surveys show a lead for Republicans in generic congressional polling.) Many of the poll’s details should cause the Obami, were they inclined to actually pay attention to bad news, some alarm. On health care, the deficit, jobs, and the economy more than 50 percent disapprove of Obama’s performance. By a 55-to-39 percent margin, respondents favor military tribunals over civilian trials for terrorists.

Democrats in Congress should take note as well. By a 57-to-36 percent margin, voters are pleased that the Democrats no longer have a filibuster majority. Ominously for incumbent Democrats, 56 percent are looking around for an alternative to their representative and only 26 percent approve of the job Congress is doing.

These numbers are even worse than they might appear, considering that the respondents were “adults” — not registered or likely voters. Moreover, the sample included only 26 percent Republicans. (Rasmussen shows GOP party identification at 32 percent, Gallup, at 41 percent.)

Simply put, what this and other polls tell us is that Americans don’t like what Obama and the Democrats are doing. It is the substance of their agenda that is unpopular. They don’t mind “gridlock” — in fact, they seem to welcome it, if the alternative is more of what they have seen coming out of Washington. Those incumbents on the ballot in 2010 better be able to make the case to voters that they understand their aversion to the “big bang” agenda of Obama-Pelosi-Reid and that they will do their part to curb, not facilitate, the big government proposals that have frightened voters. That’s a hard case to make for the Democrats, who have already voted repeatedly for that now unpopular agenda. And that is why 2010 promises to be a very scary election for anyone with a “D” next to his or her name.