American politics is a "strange breed". With a voting public that does NOT vote in masse combined with their ignorance of foreign issues, the combination makes for a disaster.
Historically, the US has wanted to be treated as a "nation untouchable" due to it's relative isolation, a country that spans shore to shore, hemmed in on two sides by ocean and to the north and south by only two countries to call our direct "neighbors". This has lead to a mentality in much of the American public that since Canada seems to be our "friend" and Mexico must be "dealt with", what happens within our own nation is what matters most. Thus, much of the voting public votes primarily on domestic issues, those things they DEEM are affecting their daily lives.
This mentality has made the US particularly vulnerable to "outside influence". If an interested party is powerful enough to convince the American public that their interests somehow coincide with American interests, that party has been able to influence our foreign policy measures. This is VERY much the case with Israel and it's representative in the US, AIPAC. No other foreign interest lobby in the US has more power over our decision making than AIPAC. This is NOT a conspiracy theory, all one needs to do is do very minor digging to discover the power this lobby has over US foreign policy. Yet AIPAC is NOT registered as a foreign interest, it is allowed to act freely within US law to manipulate OUR foreign policy at will.
When Barak Obama first came on the scene as a potential Democratic presidential candidate I was highly intriqued. Here was a candidate who was SMART and personable. When he speaks he is the antithesis of what we have had in office for the last six years. He seemed to be a coalition builder and "umbrella" maker, someone who would listen and thoughtfully take into consideration all viewpoints offered him to reach compromise.
Well, then the disappointment set in. There is a saying, "A compromise is the art of dividing a cake in such a way that everyone believes he has the biggest piece." Ludwig Erhard-German economist (1897-1977). But what if one party "wants his cake and eat it too" OR one party says to the other, "let them eat cake"? This is the case with Israeli policy towards the Palestinians.
As Israel has continued an illegal occupation of Palestine for the last 40 years and appropriated land for illegal settlements, the possibility of a viable Palestinian state has become less likely as the "facts on the ground of the settlements" have turned the Palestinian territories into a "SWISS cheese"walled off ghetto. The US has done NOTHING to dicipline Israel whatsoever (by withdrawing aid or support) as it has continued forward with building an illegal wall and grabbed more land. Now we have Obama on one hand stating, ""Nobody's suffering more than the Palestinian people." and then having to backtrack on that statement because HE was confronted by the zealous US supporters of Israel.
"Last week, NBC News anchor and moderator Brian Williams asked Obama during the first debate of the 2008 Democratic presidential nominating campaign if he stood by the quote about the suffering Palestinians.
Obama replied: "Well, keep in mind what the remark actually, if you have the whole thing, said - what I said is - nobody has suffered more than the Palestinian people from the failure of the Palestinian leadership to recognize Israel, to renounce violence and to get serious about negotiating peace and security for the region." (Source from May 3, 2007)
Sorry O'bummer, that is NOT what you said, but you want people to get the IDEA that you said that by taking bits and pieces of other statements and coming up with their own "theory" of what you said. So while those supporting the cause of freedom of the Palestinian people from the HORRENDOUS policies of Israel get a "dog biscuit" you try to appease those who took your statement at face value and were offended by it (pro-Israel interests). Is this "compromise"?
Is he doing a good job of "cutting up the cake" to make everyone think they got the biggest piece, OR is he PANDERING, INCONSISTANT, and OPPORTUNISTIC? God forbid that you refer to the policy of ILLEGAL OCCUPATION as being even a SLIGHT culprit impeding peace less you REALLY provoke the "powers that be".
I'm sorry folks, but I want to know where my candidate stands on issues. I do NOT want to "buy a cake" and have only crumbs in the box. That is simply false advertising, Give me your ingredients O'bummer, LAY THEM ON THE TABLE, because I am NOT going to vote for ANY candidate who kowtows to AIPAC.
As an American I do NOT want a mere pretty-faced well-spoken politician. I want a LEADER, one who stands up for the values we PROCLAIM as a nation yet do NOT follow in our blind support of Israel. O'bummer, until you grow a spine and say it like you REALLY mean it giving me a chance to judge you accordingly, I am NOT supporting the slippery eel politician that you are.
Be sure to go to the SOURCE and read the comments. They are quite interesting.
And America, WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COFFEE when it comes to automatically supporting Israel NO MATTER what they do. Since they are the direct recipients of more aid per capita than ALL OTHER NATIONS COMBINED, maybe you need to find out what your money is being spent on. If Americans Only Knew
My Lingering Doubts about Obama's Foreign Policy