Guilty Conscious

You know, it’s almost as if seeing George Bush standing in front of Israel’s Knesset as he vowed to stand with the Jewish state has driven Barack Obama and his party backers crazy. I’d most certainly believe that the latter are crazy. However, I don’t think that crazy covers the junior senator from Illinois. He knows what he’s doing.

Barack Obama rebuked Republican rival John McCain and President Bush for "dishonest, divisive" attacks in hinting that the Democratic presidential candidate would appease terrorists, staunchly defending his national security credentials for the general election campaign.

Obama responded Friday to Bush's speech Thursday to the Israeli Knesset. The president referred to the leader of Iran, who has called for the destruction of the U.S. ally, and then said some seem to believe that we should negotiate with terrorists and radicals — comments Obama and Democrats said were directed at them.

McCain subsequently said Obama must explain why he wants to talk with rogue leaders. [snip]

Bush did not mention Obama by name in his speech, but Obama and other Democrats said the implication was clear.

"That's exactly the kind of appalling attack that's divided our country and that alienates us from the world," Obama said. He vowed to turn the foreign policy debate back against both Bush and McCain, rejecting the notion that Democrats critical of the war in Iraq are vulnerable to charges of being soft on terrorism.

"If they want a debate about protecting the United States of America, that's a debate I'm ready to win because George Bush and John McCain have a lot to answer for," Obama said. He blamed Bush's policies for enhancing the strength of terrorist groups such as Hamas and "the fact that al-Qaida's leadership is stronger than ever because we took our eye off the ball in Afghanistan," among other failings.

Ed Morrissey:

Obviously, Bush wasn’t referring to American politicians in this passage, but instead politicians in Europe and elsewhere who have either an animus towards Israel or appreciation for dhimmitude. Nothing — and I mean nothing — in this speech points to any candidate or the Democratic Party, unless they identify themselves as the reference.

And Obama even contends that Bush is to blame for the ascendancy of Al Qaeda and Hamas! (Well, I guess that if one thinks that genocide-mongers and Islam supremacists can be won over by reason, then it makes sense to shape the idea of kicking their a**ses first and talking to them later as a failing.)

Michael Goldfarb:

[F]or the record, Hamas and Hezbollah are both ascendant because Israel implemented the kind of policies that Obama advocates for this country: unilateral withdrawal in the face of terrorism. If Israel had stayed in Gaza and Southern Lebanon, Hamas and Hezbollah would not be in control of those respective territories. Why does Obama expect a different result when he unilaterally withdraws U.S. forces from Iraq?

And guess what? The Obama faithful will buy it just like they buy all of the other blatantly ridiculous notions and stark contradictions that come out of his mouth. He calls the tune and the believers—Democrats (langauge alert) and the senator’s adoring media--dance. Because this campaign isn't about objective Truth, but about belief and about keeping the believers riled up against the unbelievers--George Bush, John McCain, all other Republicans and those who would dispute anything that the little-m messiah says. And it's fascinating to watch the phenomenon in action.

Aside: I find it odd that Obama keeps talking about “taking our eye off the ball” in Afghanistan. Does he have something specific in mind as to what we should be doing there that we aren’t doing now? My guess is that we’ll hear more about this as soon as Obama’s campaign makes something up.

PREVIOUSLY: Obama, Bush and Preconditions

UPDATE: Bush's Covenant with Israel

As far as political reactions go, it was a weird one. President Bush gave a beautiful and moving speech in the capital of Israel to give voice to America’s solidarity with the Jewish state. He reached back to Herzl and beyond, declaring that the establishment of the State of Israel was, as the president put it, “the redemption of an ancient promise given to Abraham and Moses and David — a homeland for the chosen people ...” “Israel’s population,” Mr. Bush said, “may be just over 7 million. But when you confront terror and evil, you are 307 million strong, because the United States of America stands with you.”

So how did the Democrats react? They seized on one fragment of Mr. Bush’s speech — “Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along. We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: ‘Lord, if I could only have talked to Hitler, all this might have been avoided.’ We have an obligation to call this what it is — the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history.” And the Democrats took that language as a personal affront. [snip]

Obama has said he won’t meet with Hamas, but his promise to meet with Hamas’s masters in Tehran undermines that position, as both Senator McCain and Senator Clinton have pointed out.

Where I come from, we call this the "okey doke."

(Thanks to Powerline)