ObaHill?

ObaHill?

A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet

There is speculation all over the Internet that Biden is out and Hillary is in as Vice-President.  All this is projected to happen in time for the full-out Presidential Campaign in 2012.

Oh, theorists say that Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton will actually swap jobs – Hillary to Vice-President and Biden to Secretary of State.

Yesterday, I went to my favorite barbershop for my too frequent haircut, and that was the topic of conversation.  There was no shock.  There was no concern.  There was nothing but the collective conclusion that Obama would do anything to win… including putting his former arch-adversary on the ticket with him.

The whole thing springs from a piece by Robert Reich entitled: “Get Ready For An Obama-Clinton Presidential Ticket.”  You will find it HERE.

Reich says:  "My political prediction for 2012 (based on absolutely no inside information): Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden swap places. Biden becomes Secretary of State — a position he’s apparently coveted for years. And Hillary Clinton, Vice President.

So the Democratic ticket for 2012 is Obama-Clinton.

Why do I say this? Because Obama needs to stir the passions and enthusiasms of a Democratic base that’s been disillusioned with his cave-ins to regressive Republicans. Hillary Clinton on the ticket can do that."

As far-fetched as it may sound, at first, after thinking about it for a few minutes, I can see where Mr. Reich may, indeed, have a point.  But, what I don’t get is why the seeming panic in the Obama camp? 

I must be the only commentator on the right who thinks Obama stands an excellent chance of winning another term in November of 2012.  As excruciating to my friends on the right to hear such prognostications coming from a fellow conservative – there it is.

My reasoning is this (and I have said it ad nausium):  I am simply not convinced the GOP has a candidate currently running who stands a snowballs chance in Hades of beating Obama in 2012.  It has been a very long time; in fact, in my lifetime (over 7 decades) I cannot remember a weaker GOP ticket going up against an incumbent President – especially one with weak poll numbers.

The number one complaint I hear from fellow republicans is -- we have no one running, I can vote for.”  Granted, I’m in the southern part of the United States and maybe it is a “southern thing” – but, honestly, I don’t think so.

I just do not see Romney doing well in the south.  Once the primaries move into the southern tier of states, I expect Gingrich to begin picking up a few states.  Of course, his recent decline in the polls would indicate otherwise.

I mean, just stand back, and take an objective look at the GOP candidates.  The GOP’s favorite son is, without doubt, Romney.  But the record so far indicated by the polls is that the party and the voters do not share that admiration for Romney – especially in the South. 

When you consider the way voters have gone through the GOP candidates, one by one, it is clear the electorate is in an “anybody but Romney” mood. Well, maybe “anybody” is too strong.  Maybe it should be “SOMEBODY” other than Romney.

Conservative voter in my neck of the woods are STILL searching for a candidate they can get behind.  And, frankly, they have come to resent the GOP’s obvious and persistent promotion of Romney.  An angry electorate is not good for the party, especially when that anger is directed at the GOP and not at the democrat candidate. 

The enthusiasm is simply not there, and that spells HUGE trouble for the GOP at the polls in November.

It ought to tell you something when a candidate, Mr. Romney, has been running for President for fully five years and he STILL has not been able to win over the electorate in numbers that would translate into a victory in November of 2012.

Southern conservatives see Mr. Romney as a northeastern liberal-to-moderate candidate acceptable to voters in the northern tier of states but distinctly unpalatable where the word “conservative” seems to mean something entirely different than it does in the North. 

Those southern votes that support Obama’s leftist/socialist agenda are already aboard Obama’s campaign.  It will make very little difference to them whether Joe Biden remains as Obama’s running mate or he is replaced with Hillary Clinton.  They are going to vote for Obama – period.  They are, as we say, a lock.

There is no candidate in the GOP stable with a lock on the electorate and that would seem to hold true in a huge portion of the United States.

Nothing I have seen and heard, so far, has changed my belief that Romney, if chosen, will lose, and lose convincingly, to Obama in November 2012.

J. D. Longstreet                   

No Peace for the Israelis ... Alan Caruba

No Peace for the Israelis
By Alan Caruba

Writing in the Jerusalem Post recently, Daniel Gordis wrote “Life in our region has taught us that the first necessary step to defending yourself is acknowledging that someone else is out to destroy you.”

The peace talks the White House is sponsoring, much as previous administrations going back to Jimmy Carter have done, are doomed to failure. Just prior to the talks, four Israelis, one of whom was pregnant, were murdered and Hamas took credit for it. In Gaza, 3,000 turned out to celebrate the killings.

The Palestinian Authority, led by Mahmoud Abbas, is a fiction. It exists so that Israel can maintain to the world that it is willing to negotiate a settlement to the issue of territorial issues, but those issues have been settled by a series of wars against Israel going back to the day it was founded in 1948.

For Muslims, there can never been a settlement because Islam maintains that any land it formerly conquered remains theirs even if they no longer control it. That is why the proposed Ground Zero mosque was named Cardoba after the occupation of Spain from the eighth to the fifteenth century.

Ted Belman, writing on the topic of “the occupation”, cited international law, the Fourth Geneva Convention, regarding the West Bank and Gaza. Described as the occupied Palestinian territories, Belman pointed out that “Not only are they not occupied in a legal sense, but also they are not ‘Palestinian’ lands in a sovereign sense.”

“Prior to 1967, Jordon was in occupation of these territories, just as Israel is currently in occupation. It must be clearly understood that Israel’s occupation is not illegal and the UN has never claimed it to be. In fact, Resolution 242 permits Israel to remain inoccupation until they have an agreement on ‘secure and recognized borders.’” Thus, authority over the disputed territories was transferred as the result of the 1967 war against Israel.

Much of the United States today is the direct result of having won territory, largely from Mexico, in wars. A large swath was purchased from France in the Louisiana Purchase and a small section on the southern border was actually purchased from Mexico. We bought Alaska from the Russians.

As Belman pointed out, “The U.S. has traditionally, with the Carter administration being the only exception, refrained from describing the settlements as illegal and instead called them obstacles to peace. In September 2009, Obama went before the United Nations and declared ‘American does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements.’ This is closer to Carter’s position, but falls short of declaring them illegal.”

Former US ambassador to the UN, John Bolton, said at the time, “This is the most radical anti-Israel speech I can recall any president making.”

After insulting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during his first trip to Washington, backing a UN investigation of the “humanitarian” effort to break the Israeli blockade of Gaza from the sea, and sending mixed signals regarding the debate over a mosque near Ground Zero, there are no doubts which side he’s on in this latest charade.

For this reason alone, neither the President’s, nor Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, can be seen as mediating the present meetings between the Israeli government and the Palestinian Authority in good faith. Neither is neutral about Israel or Jews.

Just as Jews cite the Torah and Christians cite the New Testament, Muslims look to their holy book, the Koran, to justify their current actions. To understand today’s turmoil wherever Muslims assert their claims, one must understand that the Koran and the Hadith, prophetic traditions based on it and Muhammad’s life, are filled with hatred for Jews and Christians.

Even with the attacks of 9/11 and others since then, Americans have been slow to grasp that they are locked into a religious war with Islam. A society where religious tolerance is part of its most prized documents cannot understand a religion whose holy book calls for the conquest of all other religions and global political dominance.

There will be no peace for Israel, for the United States, and for the world so long as a religion that celebrates murder and death continues to pursue its mission based on the myths of Muhammad and his followers.

Alan Caruba

© Alan Caruba, 2010

__________________

Alan Caruba's commentaries are posted daily at "Warning Signs" his popular blog and thereafter on dozens of other websites and blogs. If you love to read, visit his monthly report on new books at Bookviews. To visit his Facebook page, click here For information on his professional skills, Caruba.com is the place to visit.