Obama, Too JV to Change!

<

===

The White House could change but it will not. Obama has no desire to admit he has blown it.  Too proud, too arrogant, too confused and too JV! (See 1 and 1a below.)

Obama has been telling us he will not accept a bad deal but he will do a deal and call it a good one. Obama has proven he is a lair time and again and is untrustworthy and Iran has proven they are even more so.

Iran hangs in there and Obama bites his nails! (See 1b below.)

http://www.israpundit.org/archives/63605713?utm_source=emailcampaign2236&utm_medium=phpList&utm_content=HTMLemail&utm_campaign=ISRAPUNDIT+DAILY+DIGEST+MAR+30%2F15

===

This from a very old and dear Christian friend and now fellow memo reader after we just reconnected: " Someone finally explained it to me, Jews are liberals first and Jews second.  Hope we all survive O."  

I reminded him "Jews are like people, only more so."

=== 
Last notice for those who are coming to visit The Savannah Classical Academy, Friday, April 17.

If you wish to come please let me know so I can send you the details.  thanks, Me
===
As my friend, I spoke with this morning, said, Obama's next bomb will be his resort to gutting Israel through the U.N.  (See 2 below.)
===
This from a very old and dear friend and fellow memo reader.  

A woman in his Florida retirement village has a totally different and perverse slant on Obama and actually thanks him for what he has accomplished!  (See 3 below.)
===

Dick

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1)  The White House’s Dangerous Game of False Choices

America needs to have a serious debate about the grave threats posed by Iran and Islamic extremism, but the White House continues to play a dangerous game of false choices.

Appearing yesterday on CNN’s State of the Union, Speaker Boehner talked about the Obama administration’s attacks on Prime Minister Netanyahu’s recent address to Congress and growing bipartisan concerns with the administration’s approach in the Middle East:

“I have one goal. That goal is to make sure that the American people heard and the Congress heard about the serious threat that Iran poses not only to the Middle East but for the rest of the world including the United States… The president doesn't want to talk about it. Doesn't want to talk about the threat of radical Islam and the fact that he has no strategy to deal with it.”

That prompted the following response from White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest:

"I will simply say that if John Boehner thinks that U.S. troops should be on the ground in Yemen fighting the Houthis, or that we should re-occupy Iraq, or that the United States should bomb Iran to prevent them from obtaining a nuclear weapon, then he should have the courage of his convictions to actually say so.”

The White House has attempted to construct this false choice again and again. It would have Americans believe that anyone who questions the president wants war with Iran and hundreds of thousands of American troops on the ground in places like Iraq and Yemen.

This is not only ridiculous, it’s dangerous at a time when everyone but the White House understands the president’s policies are failing. Over the course of the last week alone, the administration’s foreign policy has been described as “a total mess” by VOX.com, “incoherent” and “convoluted” by NBC’s Richard Engel, and “willful ignorance” by the former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency.

It’s not too late to change course and have a serious conversation about a comprehensive strategy to protect the American people, our allies, and our interests abroad. But the White House is going to have to stop playing games and admit its failed approach isn’t working. 

1a)  Obama Creates Chaos and Calls it 'Peace'

By James Lewis

President Obama has surrendered to Iran’s fanatical thirst for nukes, and now all of Iran’s Muslim enemies are going to war, because they understand the mullahs a lot better than Obama does.

A huge regional war is breaking out between the two biggest enemies in Islam, the Sunnis and Shi’ites. This war has its roots in Ayatollah Khomeini, Jimmy Carter’s favorite Islamofascist “spiritual leader,” who was allowed to take over the 70 million people of Iran by the terminally delusional Carter regime.

But our guy Obama has made everything worse, by siding with the two most extreme and murderous forces in the region, the mullahs of Iran on the Shi’ite side, and the Muslim Brotherhood on the Sunni side.

In this mess you need a scorecard. Here's one.

1) Saudi Arabia is the center of worldwide Islam. It’s run by a radical Sunni  theocracy that sends hate preachers all over the world, who tell their followers that violent jihad against the West will win them a place in Paradise. That’s why we get Muslims blowing themselves all over the world, taking with them as many infidels as possible. 

SCORE: Winner: Sunni War Priests. Obama zero.

2) Iran is the biggest 1000-year enemy of the Saudis. But eighty percent of Muslims worldwide are Sunnis, and follow the Saudi line. Iran wants to conquer the holy cities of Mecca and Medina from the Saudis.

SCORE: Winner: Iranian and Sunni war priests. Obama zero.

3) From the beginning of Obamanismo, the U.S. has tried to destabilize Egypt, Syria, Israel, Libya, and a few other odds and ends. Egypt revolted against Obama’s friends of the Muslim Brotherhood, so Obama scored 0 there. Libya fell apart into civil war when NATO criminally bombed a regime that did not threaten their interests in the least.

SCORE: Winner: Al Qaida in the Maghreb. Obama zero.

4) Syria fell apart due to Obama’s much hyped-up “Arab Spring,” with the Alawite Assad fighting even more evil Sunni thugs like Al Nusrah and finally ISIS. Obama has tried over and over again to overthrow Assad, with a big backlash, so that now Syria is the biggest horror story on the planet, with more than 200,000 dead and millions of refugees.

SCORE: Winner: Iran, which now has troops in Syria, plus its obedient war party Hizb’allah. Obama, zero.

5) Iran has sent high officers to spy out the land all the way to the Golan Heights, where Israel bombed a dozen of them to death.

SCORE: Israel vs. Iran – a tie so far. Obama zero.

6) In return for Iranian aggression --- made much worse by Obama’s surrender  on Iranian nukes --- the Saudis can call on the following allied armies, navies, and air forces:

A) On the Arabian Peninsula, all the Gulf sheikhdoms except Qatar.

B) The large and technically advanced armies of Egypt, Jordan, and Pakistan.

C) The militant Sunni tribes of Iraq and Syria.

Now recall the strategic situation. Iran has been enabled by the United States from Jimmy Carter to Obama to encircle and threaten Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt. By controlling the choke point of the Gulf, Iran can close off tanker traffic at will. But now an Iranian proxy tribe, the Houthis, has taken Obama and the Saudis by complete surprise; they are close to choking off the Red Sea ports of Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

SCORE: Winner: Iran. Obama zero.

7) Saudi Arabia and its Sunni allies are now going to war by sending naval vessels to the mouth of the Red Sea and bombarding the Houthis with several different Arab air forces allied to the Saudis.

SCORE: Unknown. Chances are that the Sunni armies will beat smaller Iranian and proxy forces at the mouth of the Red Sea. But war is unpredictable.

Bottom line: While Obama and the Euroleft have focused idiotically on Israel and the fictional Palestinians (who are Arabs under a different name to fool the suckers), Iran has been quietly advancing a huge strategic pincer movement through Iraq, Lebanon, and Syria. Yemen is the southern end of the strategic pincer.

Iran has just threatened to invade Jordan, and of course Israel is their biggest hate object over decades of media propaganda in the Arab Middle East and Europe. But now the Sunnis need help from Israel, especially if this thing goes nuclear, so they are making nice.

SCORE: Arab-Israeli peace WINS, in spite of Obama. Obama has lost any credibility he ever had in the region, so he scores… zero.

Meanwhile, Our Hero has ordered USAF ground-support to both sides of the great Muslim divide, the Iranians in Iraq, and their deadly enemies the Saudis in Yemen.

Senator Richard Burr, who chairs the Senate Intelligence Committee, was quoted saying “We’re totally out… Yemen is going to be [an] absolute failure of our foreign policy.”

You can say that for the rest of Obama’s meddling, too. 

1b) MEMRI Inquiry & Analysis Series | 1148 | March 30, 2015 

Tehran Has Not Backed Down On Any Part Of Its Initial Negotiating Positions; 
By: Y.Carmon and A. Savyon* 

In light of their November 2014 failure to bridge the gaps and arrive at an 
agreement, Iran and the P5+1 group together decided to extend the validity 
of the November 24, 2014 Geneva Joint Plan of Action by an additional six 
months, to June 2015. 

Following this agreement, the U.S. planned a two-stage continuation of the 
talks, as follows: 

1. Three months (by the end of March 2015) to reach a framework 
agreement 

2. Three additional months (by the end of June 2015) to agree on 
the technical specifications 
of this agreement. 

However, in a February 18, 2015 speech, Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei 
announced that he completely disagreed with this procedure, and determined 
that an agreement would be arrived at not in two stages but in one stage to 
be completed by the end of June 2015, and that the agreement would include 
the removal of all sanctions on Iran. This means that the March 31, 2015 
deadline is completely unimportant to Khamenei. 

The U.S. is disregarding Khamenei's announcement, and is attempting, without 
success, to force Iran into the two-stage process that it set out. Iran is 
refusing to sign any interim document, and for this reason Western foreign 
ministers involved in the negotiations, such as U.K. Foreign Minister 
Phillip Hammond, are saying that understandings which might be reached at 
this stage will only be oral ones. 

It should be emphasized that Iran has not backed down in any way, at any 
stage, from the positions with which it began the talks: 

1. Tehran rejects the removal of its enriched uranium from Iran. 

2. Tehran rejects a gradual lifting of the sanctions. 

3. Tehran rejects restriction of the number of its centrifuges. 

4. Tehran rejects intrusive inspections and snap inspections. 

5. Tehran rejects any halt to its research and development 
activity. 

6. Tehran rejects any change to the nature of its heavy water 
reactor at Arak. 

7. Tehran rejects any closure of its secret enrichment site at 
Fordow. 

8. Tehran rejects all restrictions to its nuclear activity 
following the agreement's expiration. 

9. Tehran rejects the inclusion of its long-range missile program 
in the negotiations. 

10. Tehran rejects reporting on its previous clandestine military 
nuclear activity. 

11. Tehran rejects allowing inspections of military sites 
suspected of conducting nuclear activity. 

In his February 18, 2015 announcement, Khamenei specified that he would 
accept only a single-stage agreement, and that this agreement must include 
the lifting of all sanctions on Iran and that it must clearly state that the 
West may not take advantage of the framework agreement in order to force its 
position on Iran in the second stage when the details are discussed. 

The following is Khamenei's February 18 announcement about the nuclear 
negotiations:[1] 

"The hands of the Iranian nation and its senior officials were never tied, 
and we have shown this to be so. From now on, we will also demonstrate this 
with our initiatives and our courage. It is America that is stuck and 
entangled in a problem, and the entire reality inside and outside the region 
proves this. 

"It is you [Americans] who have continually been defeated for these many 
years; it is the Islamic Republic of Iran that advances, and can in no way 
be compared to [to the Iran of] 30-some years ago… 

"Iran is moving forward, while the Americans, who have not succeeded in 
uprooting [the Islamic Republic of Iran], are now forced to tolerate the 
regime of the Islamic Republic. Their political, security, economic and 
cultural plans will not stop us from advancing... 

"[In the nuclear negotiations,] I will accept an implementable plan, but I 
will not accept a bad agreement. Like the Americans, I too believe that 
failing to reach an agreement is preferable to a bad agreement, and I 
believe that failure to reach an agreement is preferable to an agreement 
that will damage Iran's national interests and pave the way for the 
humiliation of the Iranian nation. 

"The conduct of the U.S. in the negotiations, and of some of the European 
countries that obey it, is illogical. Because of their many expectations, 
they think all their demands will be met, but this is not how negotiations 
work. The Iranian nation will not tolerate bullying, greed, and irrational 
conduct. I agree to continue to advance in the negotiations in order to 
arrive at a good agreement… The negotiations must maintain the honor of the 
Iranian nation, and the advancement [of its nuclear program]... 

"A scenario of agreement on general principles, and shortly thereafter 
agreement on the details, is not recommended, because our experience with 
the opposite side's conduct [in the negotiations shows] that a framework 
agreement will serve [them] as a tool for inventing a series of excuses in 
[the negotiations on] the details. If an agreement is to be reached, it must 
be a single-stage agreement, and it must include the general framework as 
well as the details. The agreement's content must be clear, and not open to 
interpretation. The agreement's sections must not be such that the opposing 
side, which is used to bargaining, will search for excuses on the various 
issues. The sanctions must be completely removed." 

Additionally, Khamenei threatens to impose natural gas sanctions, saying: 
"If there are to be sanctions, the Iranian nation can and will also impose 
sanctions." 

*Y. Carmon is President and Founder of MEMRI; A. Savyon is director of 
MEMRI's Iranian Media project. 

[1] Leader.ir, February 18. 2015. 

The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) is an independent, 
non-profit organization that translates and analyzes the media of the Middle 
East. Copies of articles and documents cited, as well as background 
information, are available on request. 

MEMRI holds copyrights on all translations. Materials may only be used with 
proper attribution.-

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2) Obama’s next earthquake

By Jackson Diehl, Deputy editorial page editor  

President Obama’s rhetorical assault on Benjamin Netanyahu last week was in part the product of pique. But it also set the stage for what could be another crockery-breaking bid by Obama for a foreign policy legacy, on a par with his opening to Cuba and would-be nuclear deal with Iran.

By declaring Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations dead and blaming Netanyahu, Obama laid the predicate for a decision to go forward with a U.S.-backed U.N. Security Council resolution that would set the terms for a final peace settlement. Envisioned as an updating of U.N. Resolution 242, which has been part of the framework for the Mideast “peace process” since the 1960s, the idea would be to mandate the solution to the questions Israelis and Palestinians have been unable to agree upon for decades, such as the future status of Jerusalem. Not incidentally, it would provide Obama with the Mideast legacy he has craved since his first day in office.

Whether or not it accelerated Palestinian statehood (and most likely it wouldn’t), Obama’s initiative would set off an earthquake in U.S. foreign relations and for Israel’s standing in the world. For nearly half a century, the United States has taken the position that the terms for a peace settlement between Israelis and Palestinians must come about as the result of negotiations and not as an imposition by outside parties. At the United Nations, it has been a given that Washington will veto resolutions that aim to compel Israel to accept terms.

Now Obama is contemplating going forward with a resolution that was drafted last year by Secretary of State John Kerry and his Mideast negotiations team at the State Department. The language was drawn up in response to efforts by the Palestinians and France to win support for Security Council resolutions following the collapse of Kerry’s attempt to get Israeli and Palestinian assent to a “framework agreement.” France announced on Friday that it would renew its initiative, giving Obama a fresh prompt.

Obama chose not to proceed in November after appeals by Netanyahu’s domestic opponents, who were hoping to defeat him in this month’s election. Now that the White House’s Israeli nemesis is on his way toforming another right-wing government, that constraint no longer applies. As in the case with restoring relations with Cuba, Obama can also disregard the domestic political considerations that restrained him before he began his “fourth quarter” in office.

Administration officials indicated last week that the president has not yet decided whether to support a French resolution or offer a U.S. alternative. If he does make the attempt, Obama is likely to find himself bedeviled by the same thorny issues that have prevented negotiations from succeeding all this time.

The first is which parameters for Palestinian statehood to include in a U.N. resolution. The administration’s language would probably stipulate that Palestine’s territory would be based on Israel’s pre-1967 borders with the West Bank and Gaza Strip, with territorial swaps to allow Israel’s annexation of some Jewish settlements. Most likely it would declare that Jerusalem would be the capital of both nations.

Israeli officials, who are aware of the U.S. draft, say that while these terms, much sought by the Palestinians, would be very specific, some of Israel’s biggest priorities would be covered by much vaguer language. A description of security arrangements would glide over the question of exactly how the West Bank and Gaza would be prevented from becoming a launching pad for attacks on Israel, while the thorny question of Palestinian refugees would be dispatched with a call for an “agreed solution.” The result could be to complicate any eventual trade-off of Israeli concessions on territory for Palestinian give on the “return” of refugees, since the Security Council would already have mandated Israel’s position.

The U.S. draft probably would have one element that would please Netanyahu and infuriate Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas, however: a stipulation that Israel would remain the homeland of the Jewish people. Abbas’s categorical rejection of that principle helped to cause the breakdown of Kerry’s diplomacy, and it would almost certainly mean that the Palestinians would join Israelis in rejecting the resolution.

Why go forward with a text that both sides would spurn? Obama’s hope would be that his initiative could win unanimous support from the Security Council and thus set the terms of reference for a future settlement, presumably under different Israeli and Palestinian leaders. He could eventually become the grandfather of Middle East peace; at a minimum, diplomats who now talk of the “Clinton parameters” from 2000 would henceforth speak of the “Obama framework.”

There would be other effects, of course, among them an unprecedented breach in U.S.-Israeli relations and a vast acceleration of the global movement to boycott and sanction the Jewish state in the likely event it resisted the U.N. terms. But judging from Obama’s demeanor in assailing Netanyahu last week, the president might welcome that legacy, too.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3) One Of The Older Ladies That Lives With Us Here At our Assisted Living Facility in Florida really Loves Obama

This is certainly a different way to look at what is happening....................

One 82-year-old lady loves Obama and she may have a very good point.  She says that Obama is amazing, and is rebuilding the American dream!  She gives us an entirely new slant on the "amazing" job Obama is doing, and she says that she will thank God for the President.  Keep reading for her additional comments and an explanation. When discussing Obama, she says:

1. Obama destroyed the Clinton Political Machine, driving a stake through the heart of Hillary's presidential aspirations - something no Republican was ever able to do.

2. Obama killed off the Kennedy Dynasty - no more Kennedy's trolling Washington looking for booze and women wanting rides home.

3. Obama is destroying the Democratic Party before our eyes! Dennis Moore had never lost a race. Evan Bayh had never lost a race. Byron Dorgan had never lost a race. Harry Reid - soon to be GONE! These are just a handful of the Democrats whose political careers Obama has destroyed. By the end of 2016, dozens more will be gone. Just think, in December of 2008 the Democrats were on the rise. In two election cycles, they had picked up 14 Senate seats and 52 House seats. The press was touting the death of the Conservative Movement and the Republican Party. However, in just one term, Obama put a stop to all of this and gave the House and the Senate - back to the Republicans.

4. Obama has completely exposed liberals and progressives for what they are. Sadly, every generation seems to need to re-learn the lesson on why they should never actually put liberals in charge. Obama is bringing home the lesson very well: Liberals tax, borrow and spend. Liberals won't bring themselves to protect America. Liberals want to take over the economy. Liberals think they know what is best for everyone. Liberals are not happy until they are running YOUR life.

5. Obama has brought more Americans back to conservatism than anyone since Reagan. In one term, he has rejuvenated the Conservative Movement and brought out to the streets millions of freedom loving Americans. Name one other time when you saw your friends and neighbors this interested in taking back America! 

6. Obama, with his "amazing leadership," has sparked the greatest period of sales of firearms and ammunition this country has seen. Law abiding citizens have rallied and have provided a "stimulus" to the sporting goods field while other industries have failed, faded, or moved off-shore.    

7. In all honesty, 4 years ago I was more afraid than I have been in my life. Not afraid of the economy, but afraid of the direction our country was going. I thought, Americans have forgotten what this country is all about. My neighbors and friends, even strangers, have proved to me that my lack of confidence in the greatness and wisdom of the American people has been flat wrong.     

8. When the American people wake up, no smooth talking teleprompter reader can fool them! Barack Obama has served to wake up these great Americans! Again, I want to say: "Thank you, Barack Obama!" After all, this is exactly the kind of hope and change we desperately needed!!     

9. He has saved Carter’s legacy and made Jimmy Carter happy, since Jimmy is no longer the worst president we've ever had.  Credit goes to where credit is due.

THANK YOU OBAMA

-------------------------------------------------------------