“some people” believe the United States “should negotiate with terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along."
"We have heard this foolish delusion before," Bush said. "As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: 'Lord, if I could only have talked to Hitler, all this might have been avoided.' We have an obligation to call this what it is—the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history."
Now, Obama interpreted the comments to mean an attack on himself. Here is how he responded.
It is sad that President Bush would use a speech to the Knesset on the 60th anniversary of Israel's independence to launch a false political attack," Obama said in the statement his aides distributed. "George Bush knows that I have never supported engagement with terrorists, and the president's extraordinary politicization of foreign policy and the politics of fear do nothing to secure the American people or our stalwart ally Israel."
Now, several media observers have pointed out that not only was Obama not mentioned by name but that the much more likely recipient of the comments was Jimmy Carter, who recently met with Hamas.
Of course, that hasn't stopped several prominent Democrats from responding. Here is how Senator Biden responded.
This is bullshit, this is malarkey. This is outrageous, for the president of the United States to go to a foreign country, to sit in the Knesset . . . and make this kind of ridiculous statement.”
“He is the guy who has weakened us,” he said. “He has increased the number of terrorists in the world. It is his policies that have produced this vulnerability that the U.S. has. It’s his [own] intelligence community [that] has pointed this out, not me.
Now, while Biden was long on crude and inappropriate language, what he was short on was exactly what about the statement it was that he didn't like.
John Kerry was next.
(Bush) is still playing the disgusting and dangerous political game Karl Rove perfected, which is insulting to every American and disrespectful to our ally Israel. George Bush should be making Israel secure, not slandering Barack Obama from the Knesset.
Then, it was Dick Durbin.
There is no escaping what the president is doing," said Durbin, who supports Obama. "It is an attack on Sen. Obama’s position that we should not be avoiding even those we disagree with when it comes to negotiations and diplomacy.
Tom Daschle said this.
Finally, the Speaker of the House had her say.
I am shocked and, actually, very, very saddened by what the President has done,” Daschle said during an interview he gave to Fox News.
“This is an unprecedented political attack that we’ve never seen a president do before.”
would hope that any serious person that aspires to lead the country, would disassociate themselves from those comments.”Now, a few things come to mind when listening to all of the protests of the Democrats. The first is this Shakespeare line
The tradition has always been that when a U.S. president is overseas, partisan politics stops at the water's edge. President Bush has now taken that principle and turned it on its head: for this White House, partisan politics now begins at the water’s edge, no matter the seriousness and gravity of the occasion. Does the president have no shame?”
me thinks thou dost protest a bit too muchThe President didn't directly call anyone out. He simply spoke at the Knesset and said that he believed that those that think that negotiating with evil folks are wrong. He put it into historical context by using the Hitler example. If they see their version of foreign policy as that which tries to negotiate with terrorists, then that is their problem. Hitler should have proved to everyone for all time that negotiating with evil only leads to disaster. If that simple if not obvious reference exposes the futility of Obama's foreign policy strategy, then with all due respect, the problem isn't the President's but Obama's.
Second, the Democrats show an unbelievable amount of chutzpah. Suddenly, they are all proclaiming that going overseas to fight domestic disputes is beyond the pale. I agree, however they are coming to the game rather late if that is their belief. I must have missed the righteous indignation when Congressman Jim McDermott said this from Baghdad.
Interviewed on ABC's "This Week" last Sunday, McDermott, while in Baghdad, said, "I think you have to take the Iraqis on their value-at their face value." He also said, "I think the President would mislead the American people."
Former President Carter said Saturday the detention of terror suspects at the Guantanamo Bay Naval base was an embarrassment and had given extremists an excuse to attack the United States.
Carter also criticized the U.S.-led war in Iraq as "unnecessary and unjust.""I think what's going on in Guantanamo Bay and other places is a disgrace to the U.S.A.," he told a news conference at the Baptist World Alliance's centenary conference in Birmingham, England.
"I wouldn't say it's the cause of terrorism, but it has given impetus and excuses to potential terrorists to lash out at our country and justify their despicable acts."
The road to Damascus is a road to peace.
By her unbelievably sensitive standards, we could take that as a veiled swipe at the Bush administration's policy of trying to isolate Syria, and say that she went overseas and criticized a fellow politician. So, if Democrats are so concerned about politicians criticizing American policies from abroad, they should start by looking at their own party first.
The whole thing is silly to the point of being ludicrous. The problem has absolutely nothing to do with what Bush said. The problem is two fold. First, it appears that any criticism of Obama is seen as beyond the pale even when he isn't directly criticized. Second, his policy of speaking with evil dictators is so absurd that even when President Bush makes a simple speech in which he lays out his vision of foreign policy and dealing with evil regimes, that can be taken as a criticism of Obama's policy. Maybe it should, but that's only because the policy is in desperate need of criticism.