From US Ziocon Bret Stephens:
"Even friends of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu are second-guessing his decision to accept US House Speaker John Boehner's invitation to address congress next month on the subject of Iran, over loud objections from the Obama administration. The prospect of the speech, those friends say, has sparked a needless crisis between Jerusalem and Washington. And it has left Democrats with an invidious choice between their loyalty to the President and their support for the Jewish state, jeopardising the bipartisan basis of the US-Israel relationship." (The speech Bibi must give in US congress to demand respect, The Wall Street Journal/The Australian, 4/2/15)
Democrats faced with an invidious choice between their loyalty to their President and their support for the Jewish state?
Could there possibly be a plainer statement of just who controls these buggers? Perhaps only this: Democrats face an invidious choice between their loyalty to the President and their loyalty to the Jewish state. (Republicans apparently don't even have to face this invidious choice. There is no question at all where their loyalty lies.)
Just imagine this scenario transposed to Australia: LNP parliamentarians are faced with an invidious choice between their loyalty to the Prime Minister and their support for the Jewish state. (Of course, were such a scenario to eventuate here, my money would be on Israel every time.)
"Sensible concerns - except for a few things. Relations between Israel and the US have been in crisis nearly from the moment Barack Obama stepped into office. Democratic support for Israel has been eroding for decades. It was the US President, not the Israeli Prime Minister, who picked this fight."
How dare Obama even look sideways at Israel! How dare he disagree with its leader! The sheer hide of the man!
Doesn't he know his place? Doesn't he know that Netanyahu's more American than he and apple pie put together?
Stephens goes on to describe Obama as having had a "histrionic fit over the Netanyahu speech," and displaying "the mentality of a peevish and callow potentate."
Doesn't he know - to borrow the words of a certain ex-American poet - that he "should have been a pair of ragged claws scuttling across the floors of silent seas"?
That he's "not Prince Hamlet, nor was meant to be"?
"... an attendant Lord, one that will do
To swell a progress, start a scene or two.
Advise the prince; no doubt, an easy tool,
Deferential, glad to be of use,
Politic, cautious, and meticulous;
Full of high sentence, but a bit obtuse;
At times, indeed, almost ridiculous -
Almost, at times, the Fool."
And Prince Bibi?
"The margin of Israel's security is not measured by anyone's love but by the respect of friends and enemies alike. By giving this speech, Netanyahu is demanding that respect. Irritating the President is a small price to pay for doing so."
But of course.
Go kick ass, Bibi!