Nothing I didn't already know. But then you're a clueless Hillary shill.

"Hillary Clinton believes that Israel’s right to exist in safety as a Jewish state, with defensible borders and an undivided Jerusalem as its capital, secure from violence and terrorism, must never be questioned."

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/feature/israel/

demosaur,

Thanks for your thoughtful comment. Please see my comment above about a one-state solution. If we don't begin to think out of the box on this one, we'll get nowhere.

Which speaks volumes unto itself lil demosaur.

If I didn't make it clear above, I want to state for the record that it is the gratuitous bellicosity toward Iran (much more than the Jerusalem statement) that upset me in this speech. I just haven't heard that kind of crap from him up to this point. His cooly resonable diplomatic counterpoint to Hillary's "obliteration" rhetoric was one of the things that really won my respect during the campaign.

Thanks for this, ttarleton. My sentiments exactly.

I remember the first time I heard him say words to the effect that "We won't always agree." What could be more obvious. Fair enough. But I wasn't thrilled with the way he said it. It may have been nothing more than my impression, but he seemed a tad know-best and more than a tad obstinate.

I've also heard him say many times that it's not about him; it's about us. FDR, when he was approached by a group of black leaders -- don't remember their names right now, but I've posted about this before -- answered their proposal that he accomplish a change they were after by saying words to the effect that what he needed from them was pressure to the extent that he would be compelled to give them what they wanted.

That is exactly what Obama is going to need a great deal of. And there's no reason to hold it back until he's elected. That would set a bad precedent, don't you think?

What I see too much of in some of his supporters here and elsewhere is explanations and apologies for his screw-ups. I don't need someone to explain to me why he screwed up and to apologise for him. I want someone who will join with me in demanding that he stop screwing up.

I also see some of that, of course, but I'd like to see more. Why wait until he's beaten McCain? McCain was toast from day one. Let's make him very crispy toast, by all means. And let's have fun doing it. But let's also keep our eyes on the ball. Sweeping change.

Well if I'd only read the speech I wouldn't have been quite so upset about it as I was watching and listening to him. His actual speech was stronger than the prepared text.

It was horrible.

But I suspect it's going to rebound on him. Given the sort of people he's mixed with in Chicago, I imagine he's said anti-Israeli, pro- Palestinian things to them at some point. One of them will come out and sock it to him shortly I suspect.

Probably Jeremiah wright if none of his university friends do it.

BTW I heard today that he's decided he doesn't want to retire after all and is trying to make Moss `senior pastor elect`

So here we go again...

Yours is a curious combination of pessimism and optimism. Reminds me of Gramsci's pessimism of the mind, optimism of the heart.

But I think Gramsci went back and forth between the two quite freely, while you might be a tad stuck with an inclination to favour one (pessimism) so as not to be let down by a failure of the other (optimism).

What do you think might happen if you were to become more optimistic?

The thing is, Obama distanced himself from progressives from Day One. He already uses Republican talking points on social security, health care reform and religion. He has talked this bellicosely about Iran in the past, so it's no surprise. McCain actually chided him early in the year saying that under Obama's policy (as stated in one of the many,many debates) we would already be bombing Iran. That's something, Obama making McCain look more pacifist. Since then Obama has not repeated that pledge to bomb Iran, but I am sure he will get more warlike and rattle more sabres to prove he's a "manly man"

Yes, I hope that his belief that we share a responsibility to one another and belief that governmetn has a role to play in our lives that can be positive will serve us better than McCain's reflexive anti-government policies. I am hopeful that Obama will be better on choice than McCain but I do not trust him on those issues any more since he began his let's drag religion back into the public square.

The thing is, McCain is not just a Republican. He is a warmonger. Don't forget McCAin wanted to attack Russia during Vietnam. There has not been one war that McCain was against. he's like the person with a hammer who see's every problem as a nail. If it's a problem, declare war. McCain believes people find meaning in war. He is in love with war. His greatest accomplishments come from war. He is defined by war. He is dangerous - more dangerous than Cheney who merely see war as a profit-making enterprise and power grab. McCain wants war because he is in love with it, because he thinks it's glorious.

Sure, you can find moments when he says he hates war. Look at him and listen to him when he says it. It's so false he can hardly get the words out.

The less we expect/demand, the less we're going to get, don't you think?

Obama has himself raised expectations tremendously. Why not hold him to account by demanding that he do his part to meet them?

Jason I am falling on my ass here. His real accountability is when he raises his right hand? You got to be kidding...all these months of howling over every word uttered in this campaign and now it really doesn't matter cause of his Nomination? Good lord.....I am speechless