I won’t hold my breath.

But, speaking of the “big lie”:

Daniel Pearl’s father has an op-ed in the LA Times which is shocking in its extremism. It’s more than a little sad, coming from a father who lost his son to extremists. But it’s disquieting as well, since Pearl is a UCLA professor! One could infer from Pearl’s raving that no discussion of Israeli/US policy is EVER allowed in his classroom! Were I to be a student at UCLA, I would avoid his classes.

Opinion
Is anti-Zionism hate?

Yes. It is more dangerous than anti-Semitism, threatening lives and peace in the Middle East.
By Judea Pearl

March 15, 2009

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-pearl15-2009mar15,0,607331,print.story

Is this an assumption, Teak, or have you heard something? I’m also curious as to why he kept Gates. I thought “discontinuity” was the change Americans wanted. Gates may not be as offensive as Rumsfeld, but he doesn’t represent change of policy. Why would Obama not want his own man in that office ASAP unless he is trying to reassure Republican hawks he doesn’t plan to leave Iraq anytime soon? For that matter, why has nothing been said about Central Command and Petraeus, the man moveon despised so much, who is a conservative and under whose command in Iraq so many weapons and so much money disappeared? When the resolution was introduced to the senate to support Petraeus against the full page ad by moveon, Obama was absent, now there’s a surprise.

It sounds like you’re falling into the Obama Rorsach trap–reading your own specifics into Obama’s platitudes. I could read Nixon’s foreign policy into Obama’s inaugural fluff. The ‘Ultimate Cold Warrior’ didn’t believe ‘power alone’ could protect us (China/S.A.L.T.) The ‘Nixon’ doctrine recognized America’s limits in Asia, and Nixon adapted to a changed world where war with our enemy was not an option.

The fact is Obama did appoint Gates. Hasn’t he also committed to more troops in Afghanistan?

What do you think of that stunt with Russia–offering to trade missile defense for Iranian nukes? It looks to me like Obama was asking Medvedev for political cover (some bullshit ‘lip service’ on Iran) to do what he wants to do anyway. I’m a little worried that Russia didn’t bite–all they had to do was issue some b.s. statement on Iran so Obama could back off in Europe. But it’d just be some press bullshit to make Obama look good. Tingles would have multiple orgasms, but I don’t think Israel would be mollified for a second. Obama doesn’t want missile defense in the first place. Why would Russia stab one of their main allies in the back just to get something they’re getting anyway? That’s like trying to sell you a house you already own. But if Russia rejects the trade-off and Obama pulls back from missile defense anyway–what does that look like?

I can’t find any clarity in Obama’s position. If he opposes the missile system, then just stand up and shut it down. But trying to run some Ponzi scheme on Medvedev to cover his ass with NATO? Well, let’s hope there’s more here than meets the eye.

Gates will be replaced shortly and might you offer a educated guess at who might replace him?

I was very curious as to why, other than for the sake of continuity, BO would keep Gates in this position, given his history and the fanatical lefts looking for “change”.

I’m curious to know, Mr Goodman, why you think Obama blundered so badly? Was he unaware of Gates history and involvement in the Iran Contra scandal? Of all the appointments he has made this one is the most inexplicable, if you assume he really wants change.

Gates was first appointed by Bush and I believe anyone would agree Bush would never have appointed anyone as Secretary of Defense who didn’t fundamentally share his world view. Of course, if the strategy in Iraq and Afghanistan fail, he can lay the failure at Gates doorway where if he had made his own choice, he would have had to give the appointment more serious consideration and take responsibility.

It should be clear to everyone, including his supporters, he is not engaged in foreign policy which may explain why he was willing to fight for Geithner’s appointment and not Freemans. For anyone still foolish enough to still believe Obama has ever had any strong convictions about anything I can only feel pity and suggest they go back and read, with an open mind, his history of backtracking and lies.

I don’t like Gates and emailed my congresspeople at the time of his nomination asking them to oppose the confirmation. But Gates isn’t just lying about his past, he is Obama’s lie. The one every time he has told every time he opened his mouth and said he would change Washington.

Hmmm and just think of all those other things he SAYS. Bomb Pakistan if he gets info on OBL there. WOW.

And he just issued a signing statement not giving protection to Whistle Blowers to Congress even.

Believes is different than what one says and does and what Weary Barry says and does is very different.