OK, so Barack Obama isn't really the political Messiah of critics' caricature, despite the fervor of his supplicants. But according to liberal radio talk show host Ed Schultz, Obama qualifies for the less lofty but still impressive description of Hub of the World.
Schultz offers an unlikely theory for the renewed fighting in Gaza, one more revealing of the person suggesting it than the subject at hand --
Right now for the woodchopper from Crawford to be AWOL on this issue is just unthinkable. Where is the president of the United States? The violence in this conflict right now is now probably as intense as it's ever been, certainly in his presidency. And he is ominously, he is unquestionably silent, or should we say, speaking through a White House spokesperson. Is that world leadership at this time? So, front and center, Oh! It's Obama! What's he gonna say?! This is a crucial time for, I think, Obama to make sure he doesn't inject himself into this and run our foreign policy on conjecture and speculation. He can't do anything. He's not the president of the United States. And Bush is just waiting for time, doesn't have the balls to come out and make a statement and order everybody to knock it off, can't we live side by side without butchering one another?!
And I'm not convinced that this isn't a political tactic on the part of the Israelis -- let's find out if Barack Obama's really going to support us. There's a lot of Jewish people in America that were really concerned about him, about, you know, he wasn't going to support Israel. Well let's find out!
And later in Schultz's show on Tuesday --
I think this is a real setup. This might be happening to call Obama out early in his presidency to test his stance on this entire position between Israel and Palestine.
Ah, that explains it. To devotees like Schultz, Obama is the handy prism through which the actions of others abroad, friend or foe, can be brought into focus. But what about all those flareups between Jews and Arabs before Obama achieved this Zeus-like influence?
I can imagine how useful Schultz's outlook must be, freeing him from that problematic approach known as thinking. We've seen many variations of this regarding the chimera of manmade global warming, what with all nature of weather, including bitter cold and record snowfall, blamed on rising temperatures.
Expect more along the same lines from Schultz and his cohorts in left-wing media after Obama takes office. Obama's presidency will be cited as responsible for stability in Iraq, an end to recession, America's renewed status as Ms. Congeniality on the world stage ...
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
And Bush is just waiting
January 1, 2009 - 12:28 ET by R D HelmAnd Bush is just waiting for time, doesn't have the balls to come out and make a statement and order everybody to knock it off,...
So, I guess that in the Land of Oz, where Ed lives, that is all it takes. The President of the United States just has to issue a proclamation, then everybody just goes home happy and everything is going to be just fine and dandy from there on out.
Yeah, right.
-Dave
“Them that’s going get on the wagon.
Them that ain’t get out of the way.”
My fellow North Dakotan,
January 1, 2009 - 12:29 ET by BDMy fellow North Dakotan, Shultz is of course an idiot.
And Bush is just waiting for time, doesn't have the balls to come out and make a statement and order everybody to knock it off, can't we live side by side without butchering one another?!
I do have to agree on one
January 1, 2009 - 12:29 ET by gopsteveI do have to agree on one point...Where is Bush? He has got to be the worst at communicating / defending his policies, and awful at defending himself against any Dem attack.
Calling out Dems for their misdeeds was something I also gave up on him doing long ago.
i.e. - This guy has kept us attack free since 9/11, yet what do we hear..."Bush has made us less safe" over and over with absolutely no rebuttal....ugh!
Naw, I gotta go with
January 1, 2009 - 12:40 ET by BDNaw, I gotta go with keeping Bush silent on this one. THe president of the US will be forced to do just exactly what Shultz is emploring him to do, request peace from both sides knowing only one side can be expected to come through in the end.
I imagine he would LIKE to say "Hey IDF, here are some surplus 155mm rounds to pop off and some JDAM while you are at it" but the world political situation will not allow that to occur.
The longer he holds off, the longer Isreal can be expected to whack Hamas leadership assets and take out supply areas. Perhaps they will even invade and REALLY get to work. THis is of course, necessary.
Nope, I would send the pres to a rafting vacation in the Grand Canyon during this one. Keep him away from the cameras as long as possible.
Agreed
January 1, 2009 - 13:39 ET by KC MulvilleNothing positive can come if Bush gets involved, because the warring parties will simply ask why they should listen to a president whose term ends in less than a month. And they would be right, by the way.
There's nothing deceitful here. It's just the way the calendar bounces. January 20 is January 20. Bush has already made the ritual phone calls to both leaders, but no one expects a V8 slap in the forehead.
Because this news story is completely out of the control of America, it's a freebie. Politicians and media hacks can squawk all they want without any real substance. No surprise that some are using this to blame Bush or pre-praise Obama. It's just cheap.
From what I gather, Bush is
January 1, 2009 - 13:04 ET by RR GOPFrom what I gather, Bush is one of these politicians that simply do not do that.
The pounding he's taken over the WMD/Iraq issue, though the Canadians recently acquired some 550 metric tons of yellow cake uranium ore, is astonishing though he could go on TV any time and talk about this. Oh, and the Al-Qaeda terrorist training camps in Iraq.
But you already know the Marxist and MSM line anyway-"The IAEA has known about the uranium ore for years" (somehow makes it not dangerous I guess)..."If there were terrorist camps, Saddam merely tolerated them."
So, Bush, Obama and other politicians know to pick and choose their battles and where to spend their political capital.
One of the 24% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 89% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory.
doesn't have the balls to
January 1, 2009 - 12:41 ET by motherbeltdoesn't have the balls to come out and make a statement and
order everybody to knock it off, can't we live side by side without
butchering one another?!
That's right Ed, let's call on restraint from "both sides."
You know, if Israel just wouldn't retaliate when they get attacked, they wouldn't "perpetuate the cycle of violence!"
\sarc
since when is saying "you
January 1, 2009 - 13:06 ET by seaniepsince when is saying "you two, stop fighting" taking a courageous ballsy stand
letting things like this happen and standing back when a bunch of simpletons want you to make some looney statement takes more balls
→ Stop fighting
January 1, 2009 - 13:13 ET by Cool ArrowI'm sure we'd much prefer Obama's approach, as evidenced when Russia attacked Georgia. "Both sides should practice restraint" (or words to that effect)
I can just imagine him adjuring both sides to practice restraint as the sun glints off his chiseled pectorals.
§ Hey...I Saw a Chicken?!?!?!?
January 1, 2009 - 13:19 ET by TheSterI Saw one of them Chickens running around here....
Hmmmm....
Ster.
My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives.
→ Matador chicken
January 1, 2009 - 13:23 ET by Cool ArrowThe chicken was waving his red cape as he danced.
Or is this another cock and bull story?
§ Or....A Chicken....
January 1, 2009 - 13:29 ET by TheSter...With a ....
...naaa...a RED CAPE....
YOU GOT ME!!!
LOL!!!
Ster.
My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives.
seaniep
January 1, 2009 - 15:13 ET by motherbeltDid you just completely miss my sarcasm?
Even with the \sarc tag?????????
Hellooooo....McFly.......
Ahhh yes, it's not the 6000
January 1, 2009 - 12:45 ET by GregEAhhh yes, it's not the 6000 missles that have rained down on Israel in the last several years that they've let go unchallenged until now. And all those other wars and hundreds of skirmishes that have occured in 60 years........nah, nothing there. But now that Obama is coming in as US president.....OH YES, how THERES the reason for this latest action by Israel. Yes siree Eddie, until Obama, Israel has never had to defend itself from anything in the peaceful middle east.
And Eddie, don't forget that it's January 1st, 6 days into the fighting. Guess who at this moment is not president? That's right, Barack Obama, so Israel is not seeing if he'll back them because he's in no position currently to back them or not back them. And as far as what he says, that's meaningless. You need to wait until he is president (remember he said we only have ONE at a time, when it's convenient for him to say that), and at that time he'll be forced (or given a pass if he doesn't) to actually do what he says and not just talk about it. He's been a talker for 2 years, and everyone's been in awe of it. Will they be in awe of his actions?
Eddie, pass me the crackpipe.
And Bush is just waiting
January 1, 2009 - 12:51 ET by Jack BauerBecause as we know, all the President of the United States has to do is order Hamas to stop doing something and they will.
Hey Peanuts, maybe Bush wants Israel to WIN. Because HAMAS is also a sworn enemy of the US too. Ever think of that?
By the way, in about a month, Shultz will be explaining to his "audience" how President Obama can't actually order other countries to do anything so don't blame him for anything in the world.
Oh, and that includes an out of control Secretary of State who assumes she's POTUS 2.
Hey
January 1, 2009 - 12:52 ET by R D HelmHey Peanuts
LOL.
-Dave
“Them that’s going get on the wagon.
Them that ain’t get out of the way.”
RD -- thanks for noticing.
January 1, 2009 - 12:58 ET by Jack BauerRD -- thanks for noticing. And so quickly too.
Hey Jack B, get a load of this:
January 1, 2009 - 17:22 ET by Gary HallHey Jack B, get a load of this:
That's reserved for the incoming Obama-elect.
A recent example, is a staff writer for the LA Times writing that The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is following Obama's lead and investing in building public infrastructure. Government of Saudi Arabia is taking a page from President-elect Barack Obama's book.
Oh, sure they are. Picture all these Sheiks and Princes running around, "oh my camel genitals, have you read what Obama said we should be doing. Quick hire some women and poor minority contractors and let's go build some more roads across the sand." (;~/gary
Bad Gary!
January 1, 2009 - 17:25 ET by BlondeThat deserved a beverage alert.
Camel balls?
What a way to start the new year, LOL.....I am laughing so hard right now.
And that's a fact!
be it known, Blonde. I said nothing about camel..
January 1, 2009 - 18:00 ET by Gary Hallballs. Not a word. Purely generalities from me. Hee hee. (;~> gary
why do the people with "not
January 1, 2009 - 12:58 ET by seaniepwhy do the people with "not my president" bumper stickers expect Bush to solve the world's problems when they seem convinced he can't tie his own shoes
and why is it great that obama stands up with his made up podium etc and lecture us all about what he will do, but when given a chance to say something of substance, its not his place
I just wish there would be some consistency - and I agree about staying out of this, sometimes you just need to let some people settle it themselves
It's going to be Obama's
January 1, 2009 - 14:24 ET by GregEIt's going to be Obama's place in 20 days. He's been talking and speeching and awing with mere words for two years. In 20 days, the words are not just something he can say and head on to the next campaign stop. Nope, in 20 days, the words will be required to have matching actions.
Too much talk!!!!!!!
January 1, 2009 - 12:59 ET by Roscoe MendagoIsn't it "cease fires, talk and diplomacy", these are euphemisms for Islamic Jihad rearmament, that has gotten us to this point. Oh, how it would be swell to have the Mid-East issues behind us and everybody living in peace, but it ain't gonna happen. Israel needs to "solve this problem", another euphemism for drive the whack jobs into the Mediterranean, and if this were a problem of a Nation, say 300yrs ago, women and children would be forced to swim also. There in lies the problem, women and children, in order for this issue to go away it requires total war and those two groups will suffer.
Above is also a primer on how to deal with Hezbollah....
He's gonna get us all killed, we have until 20 Jan, 09....
Bush had the 'balls' to
January 1, 2009 - 13:10 ET by RR GOPBush had the 'balls' to order troops into Iraq to take out Saddam and to order troops into Afghanistan and to order top Al-Qaeda and Taliban leaders to be taken out in other countries...but, somehow that was Neanderthal, Nazi, Fascist, and all that.
Hey, if President Bush were to 'order' these countries to do this or that, wouldn't that make him some kind of Hitler and alienate all of our allies?
As for radio talk jocks in general, the good ones can defend any argument no matter how insane and make it sound rational. One reason I don't listen to any of them.
One of the 24% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 89% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory.
No matter what President
January 1, 2009 - 13:17 ET by pitter43No matter what President Bush would say, democrat/liberal loons would be all over him for it. I'm thinking he's had enough of that stupidity.I don't blame him for leaving it alone. 20 days left and he's supposed take flack from a pack of idiots, I don't think so,
Assistance, please
January 1, 2009 - 14:18 ET by ChaitealoverAs if he was already in office, Obama has been holding news conferences and making statements about anything and everything since election day [though sometimes a little slow with a response], but somehow I missed his news conference and statement about the current conflict. Will one of you please fill me in?
Chai
"The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money" Margaret Thatcher
Sorry, no pressers on this.
January 1, 2009 - 16:30 ET by thebutlerdiditSorry, no pressers on this. He's on vacay, deeping his tann and showing off his moobs. Too busy for this particular scenario. Or else he forgot to pack the Magic Eight Ball, and doesn't have any answers to give to the press.
Actually
January 1, 2009 - 20:52 ET by ChaitealoverI was pretty sure he hadn't said anything - it's above his pay grade to comment on something like world peace.
Chai
"The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money" Margaret Thatcher
Maybe Hamas
January 1, 2009 - 15:09 ET by ahusserHave several objectives in mind.
This is the perfect time for Hamas to escalate the terror as Israel's (formerly) staunch ally (us) is in the midst of a change of government's figuring rightly that not much will or can be done on our part.
It is also getting good pity press for themselves because I know they know that most of the lefty world is on their side.
(for reasons I cannot fathom other than in their tiny minds Israel=Bad/Jew/Bully/Oppressor and Palestinian=Good/bullied/oppressed)
And just maybe trying to gauge Obama's response or feelings from anything (or nothing) he says about the conflict.
Change: When the winds of change blow hard enough, the most trivial of things can become deadly projectiles. From a Poster
"Hey, you kids cut it out,
January 1, 2009 - 16:32 ET by thebutlerdidit"Hey, you kids cut it out, or I'm going to have to come over there and make you!"
Schulz may be right, I remember this working great when I used it on my kids!/
Shultz... you nit-wit loud
January 1, 2009 - 18:38 ET by bigtimerShultz... you nit-wit loud mouth leftist lemming schmuck...
Put a sock in it!
...another wannabe is all this tub of lard is.
"America isn't the problem...America is the solution." ~ Rush Limbaugh