The Obama administration: Let’s threaten our ally some more! Let’s see. This is Netanyahu’s “moment of truth.” Netanyahu’s decision will “greatly influence ties” with America. It’s a “pivotal moment” for Bibi. And what, pray tell, is the most important decision that Benjamin Netanyahu will ever make in his life? Whether or not to freeze settlements. Because it’s not like Iran is trying to get nuclear weapons or anything like that. Once again: 78% of American Jews voted for this administration. It’s on your heads.

The rescue will be Tweeted: Some moron jumps off a Carnival cruise ship, gets rescued by a Disney cruise ship crew, and the rescue was Tweeted. I’m sure someday someone’s going to write a graduate thesis about this, but I find it interesting only because the idiot survived.

Manson follower gets the same choice she gave Sharon Tate: Susan Atkins, one of the Manson followers who murdered Sharon Tate, is dying of cancer and wanted to be released so she could die outside of prison. She was refused. Good for the prison. Atkins didn’t allow Tate to choose where she would die. Sounds about right to me.

Work accident kills two Hamas terrorists: No word on whether or not they were planting the bombs where the sun doesn’t shine.

Gilad Shalit’s release: Don’t hold your breath. Every time there is a rumor that the release is imminent, Hamas never fails to disappoint. Every time an Israeli says they will not pay too high a price for Shalit’s remains release, Hamas says without that price, there will be no release. And may I say: Bastards.

Arms and the Russians: Time magazine is reporting that Israel was behind the hijacking of a Russian ship in July—the one that the Russians say was filled with timber, and that two sources so far have said were filled with missiles heading for Iran. This is the second source to say that the ship was hijacked by Israel. One of those sources is a Russian journalist. Hmmm. Update: Ynet says the Russians hijacked the ship themselves. No wonder they told the EU source to shut up.

No joking about The One: Time magazine noticed how wussy comedians are regarding making jokes about Obama. Yeah, we kind of noticed that while he was on the campaign trail. Jokes? Obama? Sacrilege!

For five months, Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has been fending off U.S. pressure to halt the expansion of West Bank settlements. Now he is reaping dividends for his defiance.

Although Israeli leaders have historically been reluctant to publicly break with the United States for fear of paying a price in domestic support, polls show that Netanyahu’s strategy is working. And that means that after months of diplomacy, the quick breakthrough that President Obama had hoped would restart peace talks has instead turned into a familiar stalemate.

Arab states largely have rebuffed Obama’s request for an overture to Israel until the settlement issue is resolved — a stand that Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak emphasized in a meeting with Obama on Tuesday — and the Palestinians have said a settlement freeze is a precondition for resuming negotiations. Meanwhile, the Israeli public seems to have rallied around Netanyahu’s refusal to halt all settlement construction, a backlash that intensified when the Obama administration made clear that it wanted Israel to stop building Jewish homes in some parts of Jerusalem as well as in the occupied West Bank.

In Israel, the dynamic seems to have shifted further from any dramatic concessions. Netanyahu “scored points” for standing up to Obama, said Yoel Hasson, a member of parliament from the opposition Kadima party. In contrast to the United States’ public demands for a settlement freeze, signaled early in the relationship between the two new governments, “I think the U.S. understands that it is better for them to do everything with Netanyahu more quietly,” Hasson said.

Note a few things. First of all despite their differences, Netanyahu has been working with the Obama administration. Now you can quibble whether Netanyahu caved or made a strategic retreat, but it doesn’t appear that Netanyahu is “defying” the administration. (via memeorandum)

(This would indicate strategic retreat.)

By coupling an article that highlights Israeli “defiance” with an article about President Obama being hopeful about peace, the Post effectively identifies Israel as the obstacle to peace. Yes, the reporter, Howard Schneider, acknowledges that no Arab country has acceded to President Obama’s request for confidence building measures for Israel, but he presents it as a reaction to Israel’s refusal to freeze “settlements.”

Israel’s political situation is also being misrepresented. Yes, Israelis apparently approve of Netanyahu’s handling of the diplomacy with the United States. But the approval isn’t simply a matter of Netanyahu’s defiance; he represents a large portion of the Israeli electorate. This isn’t 1996 anymore, Israel has conceded a lot and received nothing in return. At some point any country will get tired of giving away concrete assets in return for unfulfilled promises.

Lastly, Howard Schneider, the Post’s reporter, of course, ignored the hardline resolutions passed by the recently concluded Fatah convention. (See here or here.) For him to frame the issue as Israeli “defiance” is misleading, when, no matter moderate the Israeli government were, it would have no one to deal with on the other side.

The New York Times was somewhat more responsible and accurate in the way it presented the situation:

The leaders’ cautiously optimistic comments coincided with a sign that the Israeli government was trying to lower tensions with the United States on the settlement issue. That signal was in the form of an announcement by Israel’s housing minister that his government had not given final approval for any new housing projects in the West Bank since it took office in late March.

While the gesture from Jerusalem does not affect settlement housing units under construction, it at least allowed the American and Egyptian presidents to say they were hopeful about getting peace talks started again.

The Obama administration has demanded a freeze on all settlement construction, saying that such a move would create momentum for a peace agreement in the Middle East. The conservative-leaning Israeli government, led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, has balked at the demand, resulting in an unusually public dispute between Israel and the United States.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

Lebanon is circling the drain: So, when Hezbollah launches the next attack, and Israel defends herself, will anyone in the UN, EU, or anti-Israel media notice that the people of Lebanon are choosing to side with the terrorsts? Druze leader Walid Jumblatt says he’s shifting alliances—which would give Hezbollah the power it’s been seeking if he throws his votes in with them. Just remember this over the shouts of disproportional force hitting the poor, innocent Lebanese who want nothing to do with Hezbollah.

If you’ve lost the AP, you’ve lost America: Even the AP is noticing that Obama isn’t going to be able to pay for all the programs he’s trying to shove down our throats—because tax revenues have dropped the most they have declined since 1932. Three cheers for Congress, eh? At this rate, we’ll be smack-dab in the Hoover Administration before you can say “depression.”

You’ve lost the AP: Yes, that would be two days in a row that the AP has noticed that Obama is not the magician he appeared to be on the campaign trail. Yesterday, tax revenues are down. Today, the AP notes that Obama can’t support his big-spending programs without taxing the middle class. Speaking as a taxable middle class person, I’m damned glad the media are finally noticing that Obama has been lying from the get-go. Stop me if you’ve heard this before: Say, how can you tell when a politician is lying? That’s right, his mouth is open. No hope, no change, just more of the same.

Obama actually blamed greedy doctors for high healthcare costs.

And part of what we want to do is to make sure that those decisions are being made by doctors and medical experts based on evidence, based on what works, because that’s not how it’s working right now. That’s not — that’s not how it’s working right now.

Right now, doctors a lot of times are forced to make decisions based on the fee payment schedule that’s out there. So if they’re looking and you come in and you’ve got a bad sore throat or your child has a bad sore throat or has repeated sore throats, the doctor may look at the reimbursement system and say to himself, “You know what? I make a lot more money if I take this kid’s tonsils out.”

Now, that may be the right thing to do, but I’d rather have that doctor making those decisions just based on whether you really need your kid’s tonsils out or whether it might make more sense just to change — maybe they have allergies. Maybe they have something else that would make a difference.

So — so part of what we want do is to free doctors, patients, hospitals to make decisions based on what’s best for patient care.

In my entire life, I have had exactly one doctor who I dropped. It was mostly because she would book half a dozen people for a 1 p.m. appointment, and I got tired of waiting 45 minutes to see her. I subsequently learned that St. Barnabas Medical Center suspended her for performing unnecessary hysterectomies. Now, I know there are crooked doctors out there. But Obama is citing an unethical doctor contributing to the higher cost of healthcare (and insulting the medical profession while he’s at it). You know, in the grand scheme of things, I don’t think doctors performing unnecessary tonsillectomies even begins to cover the problem with healthcare.

I don’t think I’ve ever had a doctor make a medical decision based on the fee schedule of my insurance cost. In fact, here in Virginia, I’ve had doctors who managed to find a way to charge me less when I was uninsured, as well as give me tons of free medication. Obama’s smearing doctors like that is shameful.

Really, how did this moron get elected? Smart power? I’m thinking not so much. How did the American public not see through him?

At least his polling numbers are starting to reflect America’s return to reality. I don’t expect last night’s press conference to make a difference.

I wonder how the AMA is going to like the above. They’ve endorsed his healthcare reform.

Fools.

Hypocrisy alert: Egypt lectures Israel on ethics. Really, can you stomach this bull? Egyptian negotiators are telling Israel that it is “unacceptable from a moral and human point of view” for Israel to demand the deportation of convicted terrorist murderers. This, mind you, is the country that regularly murders African refugees on its borders. Shoots them in the back, even.

Hizbullah to UNIFIL: How dare you do your job? Don’t worry, I’m sure they’ll stop doing it. They’ll be back to their anti-Israel selves fairly quickly.

Red on Red: Hamas blew up a Dahlan wedding. Or maybe it was another Palestinian clan. You really can’t tell in that miasma of blood-debts and tribalism that is the Gaza Strip. What you can say is that it’s barbaric and cruel, and will not be covered by the same wire services that rush to cover every instance of a Palestinian stubbing his toe at an Israeli checkpoint.

I hate to say this, but the judge is right: Bill White, disgusting neo-Nazi, had his charges dismissed on First Amendment grounds. And I have to say that I have finally come to the conclusion that hate crimes laws are wrong. Which leads me to wonder: When the Senate hate crimes legislation is written into law, and they go after White again, will the new Supreme Court (presumably with Sotomayor aboard) find them unconstitutional?

I want my plan and I want it NOW: Whoops. Looks like Obama may have to wait for ObamaCare, after all. Even the Dems are pushing back at the plan. And tonight, a primetime news conference to interrupt—well, it’s rerun season, so who cares? If someone will pay me, I’ll listen to the news conference. No, strike that. I think I’ll watch it anyway—if Tapper’s there, there will be at least one great question. Jake Tapper is the best MSM journalist around today. If you’re not paying attention to him, you should be. He is one of the truly objective reporters on air or off.

Barry Rubin cut the bullshit: He did, really. (It’s okay, Barry, I put it back for you.) Seriously, click the link and read his latest essay. It’s one of his best ever.

UNIFIL watched as Lebanese invaded Israel: Okay, they weren’t terrorists—but isn’t it UNIFIL’s job to keep the two sides apart? What’s that you say? On days that end with a “y” it’s Israeli Double Standard Time? Yeah, I knew that.

Oh, please—Hezbollah “sympathizers”? The mainstream media is truly as stupid as you think they are.

A crowd in southern Lebanon threw rocks at U.N. peacekeepers over the weekend, wounding 14 of them in an effort to prevent the investigation of an explosion in the area, the United Nations said.

How many of this “crowd” you figure were Hezbollah soldiers? I’m guessing nearly all of them. Why? Read Michael Totten’s account of what happened when Christopher Hitchens ran afoul of Hezbollah thugs. That’s why.

Pop quiz! Who said this:

“One of the things that I know the blogs are best at is debunking myths that can slip through a lot of the traditional media outlets and a lot of the conventional wisdom,” he said, according to audio of the call posted on Web sites. “And that is why you are going to play such an important role in our success in the weeks to come.”

Your choice: A) Barack Obama. B) John McCain. C) Karl Rove. D) Joe the Plumber.

The answer: Barack Obama, on a call to liberal bloggers. He’s right, but about the wrong side. And while you’re posting against ObamaCare, don’t forget to call and write your Congresspeople.

I know you’re going to be shocked to hear this: NYDN found Harry Potter fans who weren’t happy with the movie. Please. Try to be strong and understanding—really. Not everyone liked the film. Wow, now that’s news!

And yet, Hillary Clinton’s speech said nothing specific, and did not live up to its hype. In fact, Secretary Clinton gave me the most recent in a long line of examples of The Exception Clause. Add “except for Israel” to the end of this excerpt, and you will see what I mean.

We’ve also begun to adopt a more flexible and pragmatic posture with our partners. We won’t agree on every issue. Standing firm on our principles shouldn’t prevent us from working together where we can. So we will not tell our partners to take it or leave it, nor will we insist that they’re either with us or against us.

It’s a fabrication. Because in Cairo, Obama did exactly that:

The United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements. This construction violates previous agreements and undermines efforts to achieve peace. It is time for these settlements to stop.

And Israel must also live up to its obligation to ensure that Palestinians can live and work and develop their society. Just as it devastates Palestinian families, the continuing humanitarian crisis in Gaza does not serve Israel’s security; neither does the continuing lack of opportunity in the West Bank. Progress in the daily lives of the Palestinian people must be a critical part of a road to peace, and Israel must take concrete steps to enable such progress.

And referring to the President’s speech, Hillary said:

With respect to settlements, the President was very clear when Prime Minister Netanyahu was here. He wants to see a stop to settlements – not some settlements, not outposts, not natural growth exceptions. We think it is in the best interests of the effort that we are engaged in that settlement expansion cease. That is our position. That is what we have communicated very clearly, not only to the Israelis but to the Palestinians and others. And we intend to press that point.

Both of those quotes sure look like “take it or leave it” to me.

As for the “muscular” speech that would demand action from the Palestinians, well, here’s what Hillary demanded:

Ending the conflict requires action on all sides. The Palestinians have the responsibility to improve and extend the positive actions already taken on security; to act forcefully against incitement; and to refrain from any action that would make meaningful negotiations less likely.

They have to “improve and extend” actions already taken. They have to “act forcefully” against incitement. Hillary didn’t even ask them specifically to end it. She could have demanded that the Palestinians should stop publishing textbooks that paint the entire land of Israel as “Palestine.” But the administration prefers to turn a blind eye to these realities, or downplay them. Instead, Obama calls in some Jewish leaders for a charm offensive, and most of them fall for it.

I haven’t. Obama is no friend of Israel. And Hillary is a fair-weather friend. When it suits her to be pro-Israel, she will be. When it doesn’t—well. Read the speech again. And don’t believe the hype. It’s almost never true.

The only thing you can count on is that Israel will always be the exception to every world rule.

Respect my authori-tay! Um, Kartman, call your agent. I think Manuel Zelaya is stealing your act. Here’s my question: Besides saying “Reinstate me or else,” did he stomp his widdle feet and toss his widdle head? Or did he say he’d hold his breath ’til he turned blue?

But Zelaya said Monday that he was “giving the coup an ultimatum.”

Well. That oughta show ‘em.

Redefining chutzpah: Charles Taylor’s defense in his war crimes trial? He was really only working for peace. Please, can he get the death penalty just for being such a giant assh*le?

It couldn’t happen to a nicer guy: Actually, it could have, but that’s the saying, so I’m running with it. The Dear Leader is rumored to have pancreatic cancer. I hope it’s true. And in this case, I hope his son catches it. Soon. If ever a country needed a regime change….

And now, to local news.

ObamaCare: We’ll ram it down your throats, just like we did with the Porkulus bill. The One has spoken. Congress shall ready ObamaCare, or—or—well, he didn’t say or what. (And good God, ABC, do you think you can make your URLs any longer at Tapper’s blog?)

“I just want to put everybody on notice, because there was a lot of chatter during the week that I was gone: We are going to get this done,” the president said. “Inaction is not an option. And for those naysayers and cynics who think that this is not going to happen, don’t bet against us.”

The house is offering two to one odds that ObamaCare does not get through the Senate, Stuart Smalley or no Stuart Smalley.

Fool me once, shame on me: Jewish leaders met with Obama yesterday to be told, once again, that he’s the bestest friend Israel ever had. J Street had a rep there. The Zionist Organization of America did not. Go figure.

By the way, here’s the logic Obama used to prove that he’s also being hard on the Arabs:

The president said that in Arab media he’s depicted as being too pro-Israel.

Every time I’m shown on Al Jazeera they show me at the Western Wall with a yarmulke on, President Obama said.

Well. There you go then. Ignore that speech he made in Cairo, and the many times since the speech where he insisted that the real obstacles to peace are settlements, not Palestinian intransigence. Ignore the fact that Hamas and the PA are sitting back, waiting for Obama to do their dirty work for him. And how did that particular little bit go over with the Jewish leadership?

“And you look good in it, too,” one participant in the meeting joked.

Yeah. *cough*bullshit*cough*

That’s enough to keep you going for a while. I’m off to NorVA today.

MOSCOW — With the clock running out on a new US-Russian arms treaty before the previous Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, or START, expires on December 5, a senior White House official said Sunday said that the difficulty of the task might mean temporarily bypassing the Senate’s constitutional role in ratifying treaties by enforcing certain aspects of a new deal on an executive levels and a “provisional basis” until the Senate ratifies the treaty.

“The most ideal situation would be to finish it in time that it could be submitted to the Senate so that it can be ratified,” said White House Coordinator for Weapons of Mass Destruction, Security and Arms Control Gary Samore. “If we’re not able to do that, we’ll have to look at arrangements to continue some of the inspection provisions, keep them enforced in a provisional basis, while the Senate considers the treaty.”

Has any other administration in recent history been so blithely and deliberately ignoring the law that has run this country for more than 200 years?

This is an impeachable offense. But I’m going to guess that you won’t even see it raised in the mainstream media. Unbelievable. The administration is considering disobeying the Constitution an option.