Talk of The Villages Florida - View Single Post

08-02-2011, 10:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ijusluvit

Especially for those who ridiculed the President for his suggestion during PM Netanyahu's May visit that Israel look at returning to pre 1967 borders as a way to break the log jam in peace negotiations with the Palestinians:

AP reports today that Netanyahu has agreed to negotiate the borders based on the cease fire on the West Bank.

"A senior official would not confirm outright that the prime minister was now willing to adopt the cease-fire line a starting point, but said Israel was willing to try new formulas to restart peace talks based on a proposal made by President Obama."

I'm sure many Israeli's are furious that their leader would even consider such a radical compromise in the effort to finally reach a peace agreement. But most Israelis want peace and realize it will take someone with uncommon courage and persistence to lead them to it. I praise Netanyahu for risking his popularity, and maybe his life, to try to accomplish something no one else has been able to do.

And Obama set the stage for this, in much the same way as he originated and attempted to negotiate an unprecedented budget reduction, an enormous compromise, which I firmly believe would have been far superior to the watered-down albatross we are left with today. With the far right already immovable and the left sure to go nuts when entitlements are on the table, we need a gifted compromiser. President Obama has proved he has the ideas, passion and more arm-twisting ability than many of his predecessors. He did not accomplish his goal entirely this time because of the debt ceiling ticking time bomb and unprecedented nonsense in Congress, but he will be more successful in the next year or so, and after he is reelected. Yes, I think Obama's reelection is one of the things which will be a direct result of the shameful debt ceiling disaster, and I think that will be a good thing.

You'll get some angry responses to this one. But maybe we should re-visit your thoughtful post.

Netanyahu's announcement is maybe more of a bombshell than most realize. He is a staunch right-wing and militant conservative. For him to agree to begin negotiation in the interest of peace, overriding his own firmly-held beliefs as well as those of his "base" constituency is a huge and welcome change of heart. By changing his stance on the sanctity of the 1967 borders, he has made a bold move for peace in the Middle East. What will the right-wing partisans who were so bitterly critical of President Obama when he suggested such a thing say now?

I agree with you that President Obama laid out what would have been a far more acceptable plan for beginning to correct our fiscal woes than was finally negotiated by Congressional leaders. The President was willing to agree to spending cuts that would have been 67% greater than the agreement that was reached. He was willing to take the heated criticism of his base by placing both Medicare and Social Security "in play" for cuts. From what I can see, his bold proposal was rejected only because the Tea Party simply would not agree to any kind of revenue increases, even though the President's plan included simplified and reduced personal income tax rates for almost all Americans.

I agree that the deal that was passed really is an albatross. The spending cuts were miniscule compared to what any reasonable analyst would say is necessary. Certainly the financial markets are speaking volumes in rejecting what is an obviously inadequate step towards fiscal responsibility. Some will say that the Tea Party wanted more but couldn't get it. I would say that they could have gotten more had they simply accepted the President's proposal for some tax increases on the top 1-2% of America's wealthiest and a re-work of the tax code. In this case stubborn idealism trumped an otherwise far more attractive solution.

I have been unhappy with what I've thought has been the President's weak leadership on fiscal matters, culminating with the debt ceiling negotiations. But in thinking about it in retospect, with the wingnuts on both sides being so entrenched in their positions, so bitterly divided--could anyone have succeeded in leading those factions to any kind of compromise?

The President will have to demonstrate a greater commitment to fiscal reform than he has so far if he is to earn my vote in 2012. Having said that, I don't see any potential challenger from the GOP who would stand a chance in beating him. His momentum and financing is simply too strong and their campaign platforms too muddled and confused to think that any of them could be successful in beating the President.