For those inclined to believe that Obama's words about Israel's borders being defined by '1967 lines' were taken out of context by the Associated Press, perhaps this interview excerpt of Samantha Power in 2008 might change your mind. Power is a close adviser to Obama and is a Director of the Multilateral Affairs on the National Security Council. There is a preponderance of reputable reports that say Power has been an integral part of Obama foreign policy decisions, including the mess that is Libya.
In that context, see if Power seems to be calling for an invasion of Israel here.
Knowing what Samantha Power wants reveals a great deal about Barack Obama’s own ideological commitments. It’s not just a question of whether he shares Power’s long-term internationalist goals, although it’s highly likely that he does. Power’s thinking also represents a bridge of sorts between Obama’s domestic- and foreign-policy aspirations. Beyond that, Power embodies a style of pragmatic radicalism that Obama shares. Both Obama and Power are skilled at placing their ultimate ideological goals just out of sight, behind a screen of practical problem-solving.
Again, unless Obama calls out the AP for misquoting him, both are highly suspect.
Ed Morrissey over at Hot Air makes a valid point about Obama's speech and the AP's claim that the President called for pre-1967 borders. If you watch the statement in question (:55 mark), Obama refers to any negotiation being based on '1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps.' Any ambiguity that ensued as a result of this speech was likely welcomed by Obama, especially when one considers that the AP toes the liberal line and is virtually state-run. While the choice of words may have technically reflected long-standing policy, something was lost in the translation somewhere.
If Obama is really all that concerned about being taken out of context by the AP, he would be defusing the situation right now. Regardless of how his comments were intended to be received, they have been received by Israel and Arabs who have now formed a facebook group to organize a descent on Israel's borders. Unless Obama corrects the record, we are left to conclude only that he has no problem with the AP report.
I find this portion of Obama's speech even more problematic. Even as the Muslim Brotherhood continues to gobble up countries, revealing its true face, Obama champions what they are doing and even welcomes future uprisings. What happened in Egypt and Tunisia coupled with what's happening in Syria and Libya is something this administration supports. This portion of Obama's speech makes that clear. As bad as Gadhafi and Assad are, any vacuum left by their expulsion will be filled with something far worse - the Muslim Brotherhood, a group that seeks a global Islamic Caliphate.
Jason Mattera of Human Events decided to confront avowed socialist and U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders - a man who has railed against capitalism for years - at the Senator's book signing in a Barnes & Noble. The premise is simple. When someone writes a book and wants to sell as many copies as possible, the quintessential example of capitalism would be going to a place where there is a vast supply of those books for sale and offering sign them as an enticement to sell them.
So how does an avowed socialist engage in such capitalism? Mattera confronted Sanders and asked him that very question.
