I’m beginning to suspect that there might be a bit of leftist bias in the media.
As near as I could tell in scanning the Sunday morning news shows this week, the network anchors were in pretty solid agreement that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would do serious harm to his country’s relationship with the U.S. if he follows through with a planned speech to congress next month, and further, that the invitation made to Netanyahu by [mc_name name=’Rep. John Boehner (R-OH)’ chamber=’house’ mcid=’B000589′ ] is a “breach of protocol” because the speaker did not consult with the president. I was a bit surprised to see that even former Secretary of State James Baker seemed to be in agreement that Boehner and Netanyahu are in error in all of this, and not the citizen of the world currently occupying the oval office.
While there may be other justifications, the main reason that Boehner extended the invitation to Netanyahu is because there are many in congress who are very, very uncomfortable with the “negotiations” between Iran and the administration. That discomfort further explains the effort in congress to pass legislation imposing sanctions on Iran should the talks fail.
I’m grateful that at least some members of Congress are concerned, because I am too, and for many reasons. An agreement regarding nuclear weapons capability with Iran seems to many to be very treaty-like, and as such, ought to be subject to approval by the Senate. Obama clearly doesn’t have much regard for constitutional constraints, so it’s entirely predictable that he will try to do this alone, even if doing so is an egregious “breach of protocol.” It’s also undeniably true that Obama’s worldview is very different from that of those of us who are capable of hearing and seeing things as they really are. An ever-present official platform of Iranian government is the annihilation of Israel, and I am extremely uneasy trusting such important work to people who believe that is a position they can work with, while accumulating such a record of failure in dealing specifically with terrorism.
There is no question that our national government’s relationship with Israel is strained, and as the threat that Islamist terror presents in the world is on the rise, that truth is particularly troubling. However, it’s clear that the bulk of the responsibility for the downturn in US-Israeli relations sits squarely on the puny shoulders of the American president. He has attempted to publicly diminish Mr. Netanyahu on a number of occasions since becoming president and well before his coddling negotiations with Iran began. The Prime Minister does not have the luxury of being able to entertain the kind of political gamesmanship that Obama so enjoys – only recently, Israel has been attacked by Hezbollah, an event likely sponsored by Iran, and Iran has publicly called for the murder of Netanyahu’s children, posting their photos and personal information. The real threats posed every minute of every day by terrorists surrounding Israel trump the fantasy-land worldview of Obama and his ilk.
The truth is that Obama is the the party who is most guilty of politicizing all of the circumstances surrounding Netanyahu’s visit – he politicizes the threat posed by terrorism through his unwillingness to identify the enemy; he politicizes the negotiations with Iran by telling congress to butt out, and he’s politicizing Netanyahu’s visit itself by refusing to meet with him. I, for one, hope that the Prime Minister ignores calls to cancel his visit, because we all need to hear a dose of reality from one who is face-to-face with what Obama refers to as “violent extremism” every day – and many calling most loudly for Netanyahu to cancel his visit need that dose of reality the most.