I just had a conversation with the RedLemur about how I believe that Hillary is going to be mounting another presidential campaign in 2012. Has it been noticed that she is carefully stepping around the landmines of the ‘freedom flotilla’ issue while trying to look like the neutral party who achieves middle east peace?
Ultimately, the solution to this conflict must be found through an agreement based on a two-state solution negotiated between the parties. This incident underscores the urgency of reaching this goal and we remain committed to working with both sides to move forward these negotiations.
I think the situation from our perspective is very difficult and requires careful, thoughtful responses from all concerned. But we fully support the Security Council’s action last night in issuing a presidential statement and we will work to implement the intention that this presidential statement represents.
The conversation turned toward the possibility that Newt Gingrich might run on the republican side and how the idea of Newt in the White House is almost as scary as Rumsfeld or Cheney being anywhere near the Oval.
Which brings me to the theme of this post; if I had a choice for the republican ticket in 2012, who would it be?
West – Ryan in 2012:
Lt. Col. Allen West
Lt. Col. West telling it like it really is!
Congressman Paul Ryan (R-WI)
Paul Ryan at the Obamacare Summit
Why would we want to recycle the same old war horses that got us into this mess in the first place? Isn’t it time for a breath of fresh air that hasn’t been masquerading as something else for decades? Isn’t it time for people so far down on the food chain, that the possibility of them not being involved in the corruption is greater?
Daniel Estulin explains the Bilderberg Group is about a “One World CORPORATION”, not necessarily a one world government.
Daniel Estulin, author and investigative journalist, has spoken to the European Parliament on his findings about the Bilderberg Group, a secretive and elite organization which unites some of the world’s most powerful people.
How can the Obama Regime (possibly) put forward lies about who attacked whom near the Gaza Strip, and how can the NY Times print such lies and not be sued by the Israeli Government?
“The officials say that Israel’s deadly attack on a flotilla…”
Did officials inside the Obama Regime actually say this or is the NY Times making sh** up again?
Watch the video and decide for yourself who was being attacked. (I am so sick of these criminals; i.e. the White House and Sestak, Romanoff, Blagovich, and the Times’ bashing of Palin). Gateway Pundit has the story of this video broken down.
Back to the Lame Stream Media in all it’s ‘burning to ashes’ glory. Let’s all just assume that this is a true story.
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration considers Israel’s blockade of Gaza to be untenable and plans to press for another approach to ensure Israel’s security while allowing more supplies into the impoverished Palestinian area, senior American officials said Wednesday.
Another approach? Like the one Israel just tried with bringing in humanitarian aid and Hamas stopped? Like Obama really gives a hoot about what happens to Israel, AND HAS ANY SAY IN IT! This guy has such delusions of grandeur, it ain’t funny. Has anybody told this guy yet that he will not be going down in history for anything positive and of substance? Don’t nobody mention Obamacare…
The officials say that Israel’s deadly attack on a flotilla trying to break the siege and the resulting international condemnation create a new opportunity to push for increased engagement with the Palestinian Authority and a less harsh policy toward Gaza.
Everybody should know that Israel was put in a ‘damned if you do and damned if you don’t’ political situation. Even Egypt tried to stop this flotilla because they happen to have ring-side seats and know what’s going on.
“There is no question that we need a new approach to Gaza,” said one official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the policy shift is still in the early stages. He was reflecting a broadly held view in the upper reaches of the administration.
“They need a new approach”? How about kicking the terrorists out of Gaza so normal people can get on with their lives on both sides? How ’bout that?
