"Disaster for the President"

this was a disaster for the president for the key people he needs to reach, and his effete, wonkish lectures may have jolted a lot of independents into giving Romney a second look.  Obama looked tired, even bored; he kept looking down; he had no crisp statements of passion or argument; he wasn't there. He was entirely defensive, which may have been the strategy. But it was the wrong strategy. At the wrong moment.

The person with authority on that stage was Romney

Andrew Sullivan ^

Romney's Analysis of Israel's Problems

From Mitt Romney's four-month old remarks:

I'm torn by two perspectives in this regard. One...is that the Palestinians have no interest whatsoever in establishing peace, and that the pathway to peace is almost unthinkable to accomplish....Some might say, well, let's let the Palestinians have the West Bank, and have security, and set up a separate nation for the Palestinians. And then come a couple of thorny questions...—what the border would be? Maybe seven miles from Tel Aviv to what would be the West Bank…The other side of the West Bank, the other side of what would be this new Palestinian state would either be Syria at one point, or Jordan. And of course the Iranians would want to do through the West Bank exactly what they did through Lebanon, what they did near Gaza. Which is that the Iranians would want to bring missiles and armament into the West Bank and potentially threaten Israel...These are problems—these are very hard to solve, all right? And I look at the Palestinians not wanting to see peace anyway, for political purposes, committed to the destruction and elimination of Israel, and these thorny issues, and I say, "There's just no way." And so what you do is you say, "You move things along the best way you can." You hope for some degree of stability, but you recognize that this is going to remain an unsolved problem....On the other hand, I got a call from a former secretary of state. I won't mention which one it was, but this individual said to me, you know, I think there's a prospect for a settlement between the Palestinians and the Israelis after the Palestinian elections. I said, "Really?" And, you know, his answer was, "Yes, I think there's some prospect." And I didn't delve into it.

^

David Harris' Three Missing "I"s

David A. Harris, who is a native of Indiana and current President and CEO of the National Jewish Democratic Council, opines that "Republicans have a major Jewish problem".

His two reasons?

Paul Ryan "has been criticized" for his planssupposedly to end Medicare as we know it and gut the social safety net. And, the Republicans "2012 official party platform took policy stands that are the opposite of those held by most Jews."

He also throws in the Rep. Todd Akin statements on rape and the skinny-dipping of  Rep. Kevin Yoder which Harris calls, being quite silly, as "less-than-kosher".


Harris, of course, does not mention Israel, or Iran, or Islamism.

Now, that is his quite major Jewish problem.

^

Errror In NYTimes Romney Claim

Here's how the NYTimes opened its story by Ashley Parker and Richard A. Oppel Jr. (two needed to cover for one Jodi R.?)

JERUSALEM — Mitt Romney offended Palestinian leaders on Monday by suggesting that cultural differences explain why the Israelis are so much more economically successful than Palestinians, thrusting himself again into a volatile issue while on his high-profile overseas trip.

Did you catch the error?

No?

Oh.

Well, that opening sentence lead-in should have been written

Palestinian leaders claimed Mitt Romney offended them on Monday

That would be fair journalism.  Not every statement is truthful, even if it need be published.  And what one person considers offensive may not be.


____________

P.S.  Read this. And this.  This.

And Seth Mandel.  And Max Boot.

^

Romney: Lay Off 'Settlements'; It's A 'Private' Issue

Here.

It's a private manner that should not give Israel's enemies cause to use other means (i.e., violence and terror I presume)

From CNN:

The sensitive issue of Israeli settlement construction in the Palestinian West Bank is something that should be "discussed in private," Mitt Romney said in an interview with CNN Monday.

"I believe that the issue of settlements is something which should be discussed in private by the American president and our allies," Romney told Wolf Blitzer on "The Situation Room." "When we show diplomatic distance between ourselves and our ally, I think we encourage people who oppose that relationship to seek other means to achieve their ends."

________________

UPDATE

There's

...a theological dimension to his support of Israel. Along with American evangelicals, Mormons like Romney have long been hawkish on the Jewish state, as well as frequent visitors to the Holy Land, making pilgrimages to sites like the Western Wall, Mount of Olives, and the Garden of Gethsemane. Mormons share with many Christians and Jews a belief that Israel is an integral part of their own biblical-era past and humanity’s inevitable apocalyptic future. But it’s precisely their theological and social differences from other religions that require Mormons, including Romney, to negotiate a number of pitfalls whenever they are in Israel...Matthew Bowman, author of The Mormon People, explains that church historian and Mormon president “Joseph Fielding Smith adopt[ed] a somewhat Scofield-esque interpretation—the restoration of the state of Israel is a necessary predicate for the Second Coming.” But more recently, says Bowman, Mormon end-times rhetoric has become less explicit, “largely reduced to moralism… [that] the world is growing increasingly sinful.” 

^

Thank You for Visiting, Mr. Romney

I try to stay away from in-camp arguments in public.  Unless there are factual errors, rather than differences of opinion, I have found that disputes really do no good.

However, since the article in question I am bothered about was posted online, and by Ynet, thus assuring wide distribution, and since I have already been asked about it, and I have a feeling it will come back to haunt us,I cannot but relate to it and will do so compactly.

The article expresses a negative view of Mitt Romney's visit to Israel.  No, not from a J Street or Open Zion standpoint, nor even from the Democratic National Committee but from an official spokesperson from the Samaria Regional Council, of all people.

The op-ed's theme is that

Romney's decision to visit Western Wall on Tisha B'Av for photo op is insult to Jews 

and he suggests

Romney's repeating of the expected mantra about America standing with Israel if Israel attacks Iran is not very convincing, and is pretty close to meaningless. 

and that he feels

unhappy today with Mitt Romney's visit to Israel: not because of the intention, which I believe is good, but because of the choice of the visit's date - which is terrible.

and asks that we

Think of this distinguished visitor coming to the Kotel for a photo op, all shining clean and smiling – while walking by Jews sitting on the ground in mourning for our Temple that once towered over that very spot. It is about as close as an insult to our dignity as could be conceived.

Well, to be kind, I could say that it was Tisha B'Av and the fasting affected his writing.

Or that since Mitt is a Mormon, maybe this was a blow for Christians.

Or perhaps he wasn't invited to any of the events (I don't know that and I myself was excluded although if I had stayed at the Western Wall Plaza instead of going straight to the Rav Goren Minyan maybe I would have seen him).

It's not that there isn't a logic in the piece.  Nevertheless, it doesn't make sense.

I saw hundreds of Jews doing the exact same thing, taking pictures, standing next to the Kotel and all, there yesterday.  Local residents and from afar.  And dressed quite less modestly that the Romneys.

Not only that, but the words Mitt spoke before and after the visit to the Western Wall were superb.  The photos were wonderful (see how I used one).  And after all, the Wall is but the external portion of what is truly sacred - the Temple Mount.

As some people wrote to me:

- although the timing at first seemed problematic, he turned it around and made it one of the utmost support for Jerusalem exactly on the most proper day - Tisha B'Av and I am given to understand that family members fasted for a period of time in empathy and the trip to City of David was powerful.

- the meetings with Mofaz and Yechimovitch were cancelled which means that the Kotel is more important.

- Abbas was not on his visitors' list. 

- his statement on Jerusalem as Israel's capital was unequivical.

Someone else bemoaned that 

"we never miss an opportunity to shoot ourselves in the foot."

And this is being plain mean:

It is something like coming to someone's mother's funeral and asking for cake, and then posting your picture all over the internet eating the cake, and commenting how much you love your host and promising to put in a good word for him if he has a problem with his neighbors.

If anything, it is possibly the next President of the United States coming to visit you when you are down and out and assuring you that he is your friend.  He took out time from an election campaign, losing stateside time and money and exposure, to make a point---

America is Israel's friend despite the current Administration and despite the State Department.  That the Bible-believers there will fight Israel's fight. And that he is comfortable with Jewish support. That is well-worth any slight - and I think there was none - that some people think was done. 

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

For further reading

Elliot Abrams.

B. Bismuth.

David Weinberg.

Noah Pollak.

Jeffrey Tobin.

____________
UPDATE

Romney

...emphasized faith—a subject he rarely addresses on the campaign trail back home.

"I am overwhelmingly impressed with the hand of providence, whenever it chooses to apply itself, and also the greatness of the human spirit, and how individuals who reach for greatness and have purpose above themselves are able to build and accomplish things that could only be done by a species created in the image of God," Romney said. "I come to this place, therefore, with a sense of profound humility, as I look around here at great people who've accomplished a great thing, and also a sense of spiritual connection, acknowledging the hand of providence in establishing this place and making it a holy city."

UPDATE

Oh, oh.  Look who agrees with the op-ed, Jeffrey Goldberg:

I would like very much to deal with the issue of Romney's tacky photo-op at the site of the obliterated Jewish Temple on one of the most solemn days on the Jewish calendar (the Washington Post's Jennifer Rubin and I had a little bit of an argument on this matter on Twitter yesterday, and she continues to believe that the Western Wall is an appropriate campaign stop for an American presidential candidate, especially on the day Jews set aside to mourn for the destruction of the Temple. I'm sure, by the way, that Rubin would endorse an Obama campaign stop at Yad Vashem on the Holocaust Memorial Day.) 

Not very smart.  Holocaust Day is the day personalities visit Yad Vashem.


^

Will Muslims Incite Against Mitt Romney

The WashPost story covering Mitt Romney's visit to the Western Wall had historical geographical errors:

Romney stayed in the temple area for only 15 minutes...

...Romney’s aides escorted several other top donors through the temple plaza to watch Romney place his prayer in the wall....

...Romney’s wife, Ann, inserted her own prayer note into the female side of the wall, pausing for several minutes and placing her hand on a brick. As she walked through the temple plaza, one woman shouted, “Ann! We are pulling for Mitt!”...

The "temple area" and the "temple plaza" are up above, inside the Temple Mount esplanade, the walled compound.  The Western Wall Plaza is outside the Temple Mount area altogether.

I hope the Muslims don't get over-excited and incite.

And no, Mitt is not going over the plans for "storming" the Temple Mount*

Credit

___________
*

A number of youth groups organized on Sunday afternoon a sit-in outside the Jordanian Ministry of Awqaf, calling for an official strong government position in response to the Israeli calls to storm Al-Aqsa Mosque. The protesters chanted slogans demanding the government to intervene immediately to stop the Israeli attempts to storm Al-Aqsa mosque on the anniversary of the so-called “Destruction of the Temple”. The protesters threatened to escalate the protest movement in case the Jordanian government did not shoulder its responsibility towards Al-Aqsa.

And read this ridiculous propaganda as well.  It starts off so

Israeli settlers and soldiers have staged repeated break-ins to Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem’s Old City in recent weeks, as the anniversary of the destruction of the Second Temple looms for the city’s religious Jewish population.

and gets worse.



^