Marco Rubio Rebukes President Obama
[guest post by Dana]
Better late than never. According to the White House, President Obama called Benjamin Netanyahu today to graciously congratulate him and ended up embarrassing himself:
The call was apparently made right before Marco Rubio delivered a forceful rebuke to President Obama for his snubbing of Netanyahu and alienating our ally.
This Rubio is the best Rubio I’ve seen. Unwavering, direct and bluntly driving the point home.
“As far as I know … after this election, the president has yet to call the prime minister,” Rubio said. “That is unlike … the fact that in March 2012, he was among the first to call and congratulate [Vladimir] Putin in Moscow. Or that in June of 2012, he was among the first to call [Mohamed] Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood when they won the Egyptian presidency.”
“Or that in November of 2012, they called to congratulate the top Chinese communists on their new position, which by the way is not elected in the way you and I would consider there to be an election,” he added.
Rubio then recounted the several years of Obama’s attempts to slight Israel, which started from the day Obama took office until today. He also noted that while the Obama administration was quick to criticize the strident tone Netanyahu took while running this time, officials have said previously that the didn’t want to comment on Iran’s elections.
“So they will comment on the elections of an ally, calling the rhetoric of the election divisive, but when an enemy, which is what Iran is, has a fraudulent election and kills people that protest against it, we can’t comment,” Rubio said. “We can’t comment because that would be infringing on their sovereignty.”
Rubio also points out the danger of making irresponsible statements about Israel:
“Allies have differences, but when allies like Israel, when you have a difference with them and it is public, in emboldens their enemies to launch more rockets out of southern Lebanon and Gaza,” he said. “To launch more terrorist attacks, to go to international forums and delegitimize Israel’s right to exist.”
“This is outrageous, it is irresponsible, it is dangerous, and it betrays the commitment this nation has made to the right of a Jewish state to exist in peace,” he concluded. “If America doesn’t stand with Israel, who would we stand with?”
The speech is well worth watching in its entirety.
Throughout history and out of necessity, there have been some significantly uneasy and barely tolerable alliances between world leaders. Hopefully, Obama can overcome his petulance in the face of all that is Netanyahu: from his acceptance of Boehner’s invitation, to his bold, unwavering speech before Congress, and to his election victory. These are perilous times that demand the relationship between Obama and Netanyahu be one of true allies – in every sense of the word.
–Dana
Hello.
Dana (86e864) — 3/19/2015 @ 6:12 pmThing is if they do this rather belatedly, it looks like they’re just
pandering.
I want to see someone who makes a statement now about stuff that’s
going on now and not when they decide they need to say something to
get their name in the news cause they’re building a narrative and a
campaign.
And Rubio buried himself so deep with amnesty, I don’t know why he
bothers to try. We won’t believe him. We did once and he proceeded
to screw us over as soon as he got the chance. Lucky for him he
looked like a hick getting sucked into buying a bridge from
Chuck E. Shumer. so it wasn’t a clean hit. But I’m not voting for
him.
Walker, sadly, is doing the same crap. I think it comes from hiring
consultants. None of whom have ever won an election, held an office
or an opinion.
I had hopes for him and he’s not a lost cause yet but he’s sliding
jakee308 (49ccc6) — 3/19/2015 @ 6:18 pmdown that slippery slope to DC intoxication.
I still can’t figure out why anyone sides with Palestine.
Dejectedhead (4bfcf6) — 3/19/2015 @ 6:27 pmObama is too far into the tank with the Muslims, especially the Iranians but also the Palestinians. The Israelis evacuated Gaza on the advice of George Bush, including forcible evacuation of settlers. This was followed by a frenzy of destruction of the remaining structures left by the Israelis for the use of Palestinians. They included greenhouses for the growing of vegetables for export or consumption. These were immediately looted and destroyed.
American Jewish donors had bought more than 3,000 greenhouses from Israeli settlers in Gaza for $14 million last month and transferred them to the Palestinian Authority. Former World Bank President James Wolfensohn, who brokered the deal, put up $500,000 of his own cash.
Palestinian police stood by helplessly Tuesday as looters carted off materials from greenhouses in several settlements, and commanders complained they did not have enough manpower to protect the prized assets. In some instances, there was no security and in others, police even joined the looters, witnesses said.
“We need at least another 70 soldiers. This is just a joke,” said Taysir Haddad, one of 22 security guards assigned to Neve Dekalim, formerly the largest Jewish settlement in Gaza. “We’ve tried to stop as many people as we can, but they’re like locusts.”
The failure of the security forces to prevent scavenging and looting in the settlements after Israel’s troop pullout Monday raised new concerns about Gaza’s future.
No kidding. That was ten years ago and all Gaza raises is rockets. Why should Netanyahu even think about negotiating with such barbarians?
Mike K (90dfdc) — 3/19/2015 @ 6:41 pmSo Val thinks that if the Minus Touch makes nice, the information flow will resume?
Good luck with that.
htom (4ca1fa) — 3/19/2015 @ 6:52 pmI still can’t figure out why anyone sides with Palestine.
In terms of the left of the Western World, it’s due to their perception of Palestinians being heroic, sad, suffering, impoverished, discriminated, put-upon, darker-skinned underdogs fighting the good fight against the top dog of Israel, with all its Westernized, prosperous, fair-skinned, greedy, selfish, capitalistic, materialistic people. Or something half-blind and clueless like that.
The ass-backwards nature of liberals and liberalism in general proves that, yes, liberalism is a form of mental illness.
Mark (c160ec) — 3/19/2015 @ 7:00 pmRubio is the best orator of the potential candidates. His support for amnesty appears to me to be something he believes in and not some political calculation. In Bush’s case I think it’s political.
Gerald A (6b504a) — 3/19/2015 @ 7:05 pmI don’t care if he believes in it. He’s wrong and it’s a wrong headed solution
for the problem and the one we need to enact still hasn’t been funded: A Fence.
Then. Then we can talk about quotas and amnesties and assimilation. Until then
jakee308 (49ccc6) — 3/19/2015 @ 7:18 pmwe’re just repeating every discussion since forever. And right now we have an
almost separate nation. When they have a large enough population it will be too
late and this will no longer be the United States.
<a href="This sums up the Palestinian Heroism
I’ve also noticed that many Palestinian advocates strongly believe in a military doctrine of proportional force. Meaning, they think if you shoot rockets at them, the response of a military jet is too heavy handed.
Dejectedhead (4bfcf6) — 3/19/2015 @ 7:24 pmGerald A.–Jeb’s wife is Mexican American and so obviously their children are mixed. The first president Bush once lovingly called these grandchildren “my little brown ones”. My guess is that the issue of illegal immigration may be more complicated for them than it is for some others of the current presidential contenders. . Even though many of us believe he is very wrong, my guess is that Jeb’s position is more personal than it is political. Just a guess though.
elissa (3c4c06) — 3/19/2015 @ 8:32 pmI am increasingly impressed with Rubio. I don’t know if I could get past his shaky immigration stances and the fact that he is a senator (not an executive or governor). But when I think of him (young, handsome, well spoken, and bi-lingual) standing on a debate podium next to awkward wrinkly cackly Hillary I do find the contrast in optics to be quite appealing. A younger set of voters might be impressed with him and his back story as well.
elissa (3c4c06) — 3/19/2015 @ 8:42 pmOh, do not worry, Elissa. The True Conservatives will form a circular firing squad and give us Hillary or Warren. Because there are no differences between R and D. Squishes and RINOs and folks will kvetch but not vote.
That’ll show everyone. Especially the DNC.
Simon Jester (7c2d5e) — 3/19/2015 @ 8:53 pmHe is very well spoken, and this speech was awesome. Your other point is very important and I think very rarely considered. For a politician to promote amnesty after arguing why it is a terrible thing is, of course, dishonest and unprincipled and weak. For a politician to promote amnesty because they actually think it’s right, knowing it will burn bridges, is a principled and good thing.
But if I’m going to support a Senator, why wouldn’t I just support Cruz?
Dustin (2a8be7) — 3/19/2015 @ 8:53 pm” For a politician to promote amnesty after arguing why it is a terrible thing is, of course, dishonest and unprincipled and weak.”
And this is why, no matter how great a speech he gave and how spot on he was, I could not support him in a run for 2016. I don’t believe it has anything to do with being a True Conservative, but simply being wise. He showed his hand with his amnesty flip-flop and it would be foolish to ignore it.
Dana (86e864) — 3/19/2015 @ 9:29 pmAmnesty and promoting illegal immigration will hand Texas and – along with California – 270 plus electoral votes to the Dems. A very weak-minded and short-sighted position.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 3/19/2015 @ 9:34 pmBut when I think of him (young, handsome, well spoken, and bi-lingual) standing on a debate podium next to awkward wrinkly cackly Hillary
Holy guacamole. Hillary is our measuring stick, now? Who wouldn’t look good next to Hillary? Obama beat Hillary. Picture him standing up to America’s enemies, foreign and domestic. The Clintons have really lowered the bar, when first generation American, first term Senators can realistically be considered for President.
nk (dbc370) — 3/19/2015 @ 9:38 pmBravo Senator Rubio!
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/19/2015 @ 9:42 pm“Who wouldn’t look good next to Hillary?”
nk – Hairy Reid
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 3/19/2015 @ 9:43 pmI like Rubio and Cruz just fine kicking Reid’s wrinkled old butt in the Senate. McConnell’s and McCain’s too. For running the country? Hmmm.
nk (dbc370) — 3/19/2015 @ 9:48 pmYeah, I see your point, nk. Aged, rooted in Washington, multi term senators like Dole and McCain are clearly better choices. I keed. I keed.
elissa (3c4c06) — 3/19/2015 @ 9:55 pm“Who wouldn’t look good next to Hillary?”
Janet Yellen, Janet Napolitano, Janet Reno, Madeline Albright…
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 3/19/2015 @ 9:57 pmAs Hillary continues to stumble there are some people urging another has been, AlGore, to give it a second whirl on the dance floor.
elissa (3c4c06) — 3/19/2015 @ 9:59 pmHopefully, Obama can overcome his petulance….
Not holding my breath waiting for that to happen.
Bill M (906260) — 3/19/2015 @ 10:13 pmCereal, elissa?
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 3/19/2015 @ 10:26 pmAdios America
mg (31009b) — 3/19/2015 @ 10:31 pmThe French? For a moment or so, anyway…
IGotBupkis, "Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses." (225d0d) — 3/20/2015 @ 12:42 amIt was important to say what he did, but let’s not make it out to be the oratory of the decade. And delivering some prepared comments, cribbed from twitchy, to a couple CSPAN cameras ain’t exactly the same as filling up an arena to face off against Hillary Clinton and which ever PBS donk ally the GOP is stupid enough to agree should be the mod, with their series of activists disguised as concerned citizens throwing gottcha questions from left of center, with a few from third base foul territory for variety.
Changing candidates like underwear annoys me.
papertiger (c2d6da) — 3/20/2015 @ 2:47 amMarco Sleazio sees an opportunity here
happyfeet (831175) — 3/20/2015 @ 2:50 amCan someone help me understand how Obama supposedly “embarrassed” himself in the call to Netanyahu?
Also, please explain why it’s “petulant” of Obama to be unhappy with Netanyahu’s attempts to derail the efforts to reach a deal with Iran. (It’s not enough simply to say that Obama’s wrong and Netanyahu’s right, because obviously Obama and the other countries attempting to reach a deal disagree.)
Finally, does anyone really think that Rubio is correct to demand “unconditional” support of Israel? Why on earth would we, or any nation, “unconditionally” support any other country, ever?
Jonny Scrum-half (00f585) — 3/20/2015 @ 7:19 amInteresting read… http://www.redstate.com/2015/03/19/breitbart-malkin-scott-walker-strategery/
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 3/20/2015 @ 7:25 amJohnny – do you approve of Obama’s attempts to influence the Israeli election?
JD (3fc464) — 3/20/2015 @ 7:32 amIsolated and embarrassed is the position this president increasingly finds himself in. As he curtsies before the ayatollahs, Obama channels Neville “Peace in Our Time” Chamberlain as he talks of “hardliners on both our sides wanting to crush” his weak-minded poker hand-fold of a “deal”.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 3/20/2015 @ 7:36 amJD @31 – Not sure how I feel about them, or how those attempts (which I’m not particularly familiar with) differ from how we interact with any other country, or whether they’re materially different from how other countries (including Israel) attempt to influence our elections. I’d like to hear your answers to my questions.
Jonny Scrum-half (00f585) — 3/20/2015 @ 8:04 amre #29: i don’t get the supposed embarrassment either, unless Patterico meant the dleay in making the call.
yes petulant is a good word. Netenyahu and Israel are the ones with skin in the game. you also are not seeing this same type of reaction to Saudi Arabia from the WH
I have no problem with the use of ‘unconditional’. we do so for Canada, Philippines and many others.
seeRpea (395c8f) — 3/20/2015 @ 8:32 amBecause most Americans outside of the Oval office are against the extermination of a country and it’s people under any circumstances, but most assuredly are against it when it’s based on people’s religious beliefs.
The philosophy that annimates the President’s actions and your questions are horrifying.
papertiger (c2d6da) — 3/20/2015 @ 12:27 pmpapertiger @ 35 – I’m pretty sure that your statement isn’t responsive to anything that I wrote.
Jonny Scrum-half (00f585) — 3/20/2015 @ 1:36 pmwhen the Basiij was bashing the heads of green movement demonstrators, he said it was a ‘lively debate,’
narciso (ee1f88) — 3/20/2015 @ 1:38 pmJohnny – your lack of curiosity in Obama’s actions explains why you don’t understand why we view him as a petulant child smarting after a loss.
JD (86a5eb) — 3/20/2015 @ 1:39 pmJohnny -‘maybe you could point out other countries that Obama sent his campaign staff to work against a sitting leader, paid for by taxpayer grants. Because after all the Dem wailing and gnashing of teeth about trying to influence an election, they don’t seem to give a shlt when Obama actually does so. One might say it is unprecedented.
JD (86a5eb) — 3/20/2015 @ 1:43 pmThe Israelis gave Obama a big finger by this vote. I think they are waking up to the reality of who this white house fraud really is. Congratulations Netanyahu
The Emperor (2da086) — 3/20/2015 @ 1:46 pmmind you, the Cuba deal has similar problems
http://babalublog.com/2015/03/19/u-s-praises-cubas-counter-narcotic-cooperation-criticizes-venezuela-true-headline/
narciso (ee1f88) — 3/20/2015 @ 2:10 pmJD @38 and 39 – Sorry about my lack of information concerning American influence on Israeli elections, but I do have a pretty full life and can’t know everything. I’ll assume, however, that the Obama administration acted in an “unprecedented” fashion in trying to influence the Israeli election. What does that have to do with my questions:
1. What was “embarrassing” about the phone call to Netanyahu?
Jonny Scrum-half (00f585) — 3/20/2015 @ 2:28 pm2. What actions by Obama can be called “petulant” if he’s unhappy with another head of state who is trying to stop his foreign-policy efforts? (Again, it’s not about whether you think the deal with Iran is good or bad; rather, it only makes sense that Obama wouldn’t be pleased with Netanyahu’s actions in opposition to that deal.)
3. Why would we or any country ever offer “unconditional” support to another country? We have our own interests, and Israel has its own interests. There should be mutual support when our interests are aligned, but not when they aren’t.
I don’t think there was anything embarrassing about it. I didn’t write that headline. That you don’t see the petulance in his threats to re-evaluate our relationship, threats to allow Pali representation on ICC, etc is not something I can force you to see. It is there, but lacking th curiosity to be informed makes the bigger picture harder to see.
JD (86a5eb) — 3/20/2015 @ 2:32 pmIn the face of Palestinian and Iranian desires to see Israel wiped off the face of the earth, and their having done nothing to make our support conditional other than disagree with Obama, why should they expect anything less from us?
JD (86a5eb) — 3/20/2015 @ 2:37 pmI overheard the following on Wednesday morning:
Q. Did Obama call Netanyahu to congratulate him.
A. He texted him on Hillary’s phone
…and then he deleted it!
———————–
What actually happened here is I think, at least in part, he was waiting for Herzog to concede. He finally called him late Thursday. The EU foreign minister congratulated Netanyahu much earlier – and they have a foreign policy less friendly to him.
Sammy Finkelman (9f1a19) — 3/20/2015 @ 3:23 pmObama has no shame. His press secretary actually complained today that Netanyahu has said conflicting things about Palestinian statehood, saying words matter. That’s hilarious coming from this Administration.
DRJ (e80d46) — 3/20/2015 @ 6:33 pmDRJ – they had the temerity to whine about cynical divisive rhetoric.
JD (86a5eb) — 3/20/2015 @ 6:51 pm== Sorry about my lack of information concerning American influence on Israeli elections, but I do have a pretty full life and can’t know everything==
Jonny, and yet you find time to post here. Teh google is your friend.
elissa (12a0cd) — 3/20/2015 @ 7:01 pmI wonder if Obama ever used a “congratulatory”‘ call to scold the re-elected leader before? Scold him for doing what Obama mastered. Obama is a A-hole
JD (86a5eb) — 3/20/2015 @ 7:10 pmPoor Jonny Scrote… we hardly knew ye…
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 3/20/2015 @ 7:33 pmhttp://legalinsurrection.com/2015/03/irans-supreme-leader-lays-down-nuke-talk-red-lines/
narciso (ee1f88) — 3/21/2015 @ 8:31 amtop minds, why am I concerned:
http://dailycaller.com/2015/03/20/marie-harf-complains-about-critics-of-her-isis-remarks-they-were-crazy-video/
narciso (ee1f88) — 3/21/2015 @ 10:22 amObama is indeed shameless and has it in for Netanyahu for petulant reasons. That being said, is there anything to the idea that traditionally one congratulates the Israeli people after the elections, and the Israeli PM after the government is formed?
Patterico (9c670f) — 3/21/2015 @ 10:27 amYeah. Just take anything Netanyahu said that Obama didn’t like, and say you have to look at it “in context” while keeping in mind the “spirit behind them.” That’s the trick they use in King v. Burwell. That way you can make the words say whatever you want.
Patterico (9c670f) — 3/21/2015 @ 10:29 amwonder how he will treat Hollande
http://therightscoop.com/aside-from-israel-theres-another-country-standing-up-to-obamas-rush-to-deal-with-iran/
narciso (ee1f88) — 3/21/2015 @ 10:32 am“Sorry about my lack of information”
In other words you’re an ignorant troll. Thanks for letting us know even though it was hardly a surprise.
FOAF (cc424c) — 3/22/2015 @ 2:00 amnarciso 3/21 10:32
When you have less spine than the French you are officially classified an invertebrate.
FOAF (cc424c) — 3/22/2015 @ 2:03 am