« Unpleasant electoral college math for Romney |
| The ugly face of New York Times readers »
No Buyer's Remorse for Dershowitz Over Obama
What happened to Alan Dershowitz? He has changed his tune about President Obama. Dershowitz who was a key supporter of Obama in 2008 recently has written that, in almost four years in office, Obama has turned out to be a:
This is in stark contrast to his comments in February of 2012 during a Newsmax interview, when Dershowitz stated he hope[s] Obama is not remembered in history as the Neville Chamberlain of the 21st century, the person who didn't see the greatest evil, didn't recognize the greatest evil of the 20th century, as Chamberlain did not." During this interview, Dershowitz maintained that "[t]he true test of Obama's support for Israel will come over Iran" which poses an "existential threat, not only to Israel's existence, but to America's safety." Additionally, Obama's ties with the left-wing website, George Soros-backed Media Matters were problematic for Dershowitz who denounced Media Matters as a "vicious organization." Yet, Dershowitz was "not sure how much Obama [knew] about the website's views."
On May 8, 2012, Jack Gillum of the Huffington Post stated that "the growing list of financial supporters now includes George Soros, who has pledged $2 million to political groups supporting President Barack Obama's re-election[.]"
On April 17, 2012 Cliff Kincaid of Canada Free Press highlighted "[n]ewly recently released tax documents" that "reveal how billionaire...George Soros expanded his U.S. based empire by using funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, also known as the Obama stimulus. Soros and Obama worked hand-in-glove through the stimulus."
Katie Pavlich of Townhall discusses the enormous influence Soros has on mainstream media. For example when Soros gave $1.8 million to National Public Radio, it jeopardized NPR's federal funding. But as Pavlich explains, "that gift only hints at the widespread influence the controversial billionaire has on the media..." since Soros has "ties to more than 30 mainstream news outlets-including the New York Times, Washington Post, the Associated Post, NBC and ABD." In fact, Christiane Amanpour and former Washington Post editor and now vice president Len Downie serve on boards of operations that take Soros' cash. This is despite the Society of Professional Journalists' ethical code stating: 'avoid all conflicts real or perceived.'"
At Discover the Networks, Soros' background is carefully delineated. Soros, "who had previously hosted a fundraiser for Obama during the latter's 2004 Senate campaign, met with Obama in Soros's New York office. Just a few weeks later-on January 16, 2007-Obama announced that he would form a presidential exploratory committee and was contemplating a run for the White House. Within hours, Soros sent the senator a contribution of $2,100, the maximum amount allowable under campaign-finance laws." Obama and Soros share a common ideology that includes "anti-capitalism" "global government" "large stimulus packages" "higher taxes for the wealthy" and "transforming American through immigration."
So how does Dershowitz explain away all these connections between Obama and Soros?
In fact, on February 27, 2012, Dershowitz asserted that "Media Matters Hurts Obama" because of the dual loyalty hurled at American Jews [by the organization's senior foreign policy fellow of Media Matters] and states that "President Obama should quickly dissociate himself and his administration from [Media Matters] hate speech."
Yet, on February 21, 2012, Aaron Klein at World Net Daily asserted that "President Obama served eight years on the board of a charity that is a top donor to the embattled Media Matters for America progressive organization." So how can Dershowitz say in good faith that he does not "believe that President Obama is aware that an organization that claims close ties to his administration is saying such bigoted things[?]"
Moreover, several months ago, Dershowitz was invited to the Oval Office where Obama discussed his Iran strategy. Why Dershowitz? Is he a security expert? According to Dershowitz, "Obama looked him in the eye and said 'I don't bluff.'"
And from this we are to deduce what, exactly?
In this March 2012 interview, John Bolton rebuts Obama's claims about his Iranian stance and states that Obama's reluctance to deal with Iran in a meaningful way, has only emboldened Iranian actions bringing this Islamic nation to the point of nuclear no return. In this 2012 piece from the Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz, Bolton's point is reiterated. Author Emily Landau states that "[w]ithout genuine American determination, there is no prospect of preventing the Iranians from developing nuclear weapons.
Jonah Goldberg at National Review maintains that the problem with this administration is "that it has an obsession with the appearance of reasonableness. It doesn't fully appreciate that the threat of force is what encourages reasonableness in many quarters of the globe." Thus, "Iran won't even consider being reasonable until it's afraid of us. And immediately ruling out anything but talk after every [Iranian] insult isn't very scary."
In fact, Dershowitz's faint-hearted belief that "the Obama Administration would not condemn [an Israeli action] against Iran's nuclear programs" is somewhat irrelevant and unproductive. Condemnation is the last thing that Israel is concerned about!
What does worry Israelis are the serious security leaks from the Obama administration that jeopardize Israeli defense secrets. These leaks include information about a covert Israeli deal with Azerbaijan to use airbases in that country as a staging point for an attack on the Iranian nuclear facilities and in 2010, the Obama administration leaked information of a covert deal between Israel and Saudi Arabia to use Saudi airspace for such an attack.
Dershowitz also states that Obama "condemned the Goldstone Report as deeply flawed and biased against Israel." While this is true, Dershowitz does not mention how Obama is working toward U.N. governance over American concerns, i.e., The L.O.S.T. Treaty; the U.N. reviewing Arizona immigration policy. How can a man dedicated to the American legal system not have major reservations about these policies by Obama?
Let's for a moment put the issue of Israel aside. As a "proud American who cast [his] vote for Obama" how does Dershowitz explain healthcare legislation that did not receive the light of day until after it was passed, and that was rammed through via bribes -- oops I mean over 1,000 waivers? Why is he blind to this healthcare legislation that will be financially unsustainable and is already adversely impacting doctors and health care? And why isn't Dershowitz at all concerned with the $15+ trillion debt that will burden American generations to come? And just discovered is a massive $17 trillion funding gap in the health care law. What makes this a pride-worthy situation?
Why didn't Dershowitz, a renowned lawyer, not demand that Supreme Court Judge Elana Kagan recuse herself from the health care vote since Kagan had a serious conflict of interest? How does Dershowitz fall for the racist-tinged commentary of Latina Supreme Court Judge Sonia Sotomayer? On what is he basing his belief that they are "excellent justices" appointed to the Court?
And as for the "wall of separation between church and state" I am truly puzzled that Dershowitz seems to have ignored the ongoing battle by the Catholic Church "about an unprecedented attack by the federal government" and "whether the government may force religious institutions and individuals to facilitate and fund services which violate their religious beliefs."
As to the "effective war against terrorism" how does Mr. Dershowitz explain Obama's cozy relations with and generous financial aid to the Muslim Brotherhood whose mission is to infiltrate the United States and destroy Western civilization?
Professor Dershowitz is a potent voice with great influence. It is disturbing that his articles portray a belief that with a few words Obama is a changed man. Such vacillation on President Obama's part has come to be expected; in Mr. Dershowitz's case, it is unnerving and distressing.
Eileen can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org
FOLLOW US ON