General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsBaker Slams Netanyahu as Obstacle to Peace
Last edited Tue Mar 24, 2015, 03:55 PM - Edit history (1)
Former Secretary of State James Baker harshly criticized Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, echoing White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonoughs comments earlier in the day, Haaretz reports.
Baker acknowledged his disappointment with the lack of progress regarding a lasting peace, saying that the chances for a two-state solution diminished since Netanyahus reelection last week. Baker further slammed Netanyahus diplomatic missteps and political gamesmanship, saying that the prime ministers actions have not matched his rhetoric.
###
http://p.feedblitz.com/r3.asp?l=103434369&f=17571&u=37190363&c=4915877
---------------------------------------
Jim Bakers Tart Message for Bibi at J Street
Lloyd Green
Bush 41s secretary of state came out swinging at Israel yesterday. He hasnt changedbut the Republican Party sure has.
Dont expect James A. Baker 3d to be tapped for another stint at Foggy Bottom. On Monday night, at J Streets fifth annual conference, Baker lit into Benjamin Netanyahu and his newly elected, Likud-led government. Never one to mince words, Baker told the crowd, Frankly, I have been disappointed with the lack of progress regarding a lasting peaceand I have been for some time
in the aftermath of Netanyahus recent election victory, the chance of a two-state solution seems even slimmer, given his reversal on the issue.
Tart as that message might have been, the 84-year-old Baker had gone there before. Baker, who served as George H.W. Bushs secretary of state, as Ronald Reagans treasury secretary, and as White House chief of staff to both Presidents, had laid down a similar line in May 1989 to an earlier Likud prime minister. In a speech to AIPAC, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, Baker told the folks in the room and Israeli Prime Minister Yitzchak Shamir to lay aside once and for all the unrealistic vision of a greater Israel
reach out to Palestinians as neighbors who deserve political rights.
Against this backdrop, Bakers J Street Speech sounded like a stroll down memory lane, and it could have even been delivered by Denis McDonough, the Obama White House chief of staffand indeed, it was. Earlier on Monday, and also before J Street, McDonough warned Israel against annexing the West Bank, and similarly upbraided Netanyahu for being Netanyahu.
Still, one place, however, where Bakers words were unwelcome is the current iteration of the Republican Party. As conservative talk radio-host Mark Levin put it, Jim Baker, much like Barack Obama, has always had a hate on for Israel. Wow. Levin had lumped Baker in with Rev. Jeremiah Wrights most famous congregant.
more
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/03/24/jim-baker-s-tart-message-for-bibi-at-j-street.html
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)I'm reminded of a time when Republicans were actually sane.
Now the media considers John McCain to be a moderate, even though he wants to bomb the shit out of every country on the planet
Of course Jeb Bush quickly distanced himself from Baker's comments:
http://www.mediaite.com/online/jeb-advisor-james-baker-knocks-netanyahus-diplomatic-missteps/
I think it's safe to say that Baker will no longer be an adviser to Bush after this.
.
still_one
(92,506 posts)a snake. He may have a point on this issue, but he is a staunch reagan/bush advocate, and the disaster of those two administrations speaks for themselves
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)No surprise. I never said he was a Dem.
But he's still sane compared to people like Ted Cruz and Tom Cotton, at least when it comes to foreign policy.
still_one
(92,506 posts)Peter King threatened to jump off a bridge if Cruz gets the GOP nomination.
Corker while not trashing Cotton, was not pleased at all about the Iranian letter.
In my view Baker was, and is an asshole, and I remember him during air traffic controller strike, and other garbage he was involved in.
If you are looking for reasonable republicans you have to go back to Eisenhower in my view, though compared to the current crop of republicans, nixon would be viewed as a liberal
BillZBubb
(10,650 posts)Baker is the voice of the establishment republicans. His statement adds a bipartisan buttress to what the president is saying.
The US has a long way to go, but thanks to Netanhayu, the days of virtually unanimous kneejerk support for Israel are numbered.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)Once talk radio gets going, Jeb Bush will be forced to get rid of James Baker.
Jeb Bush has already distanced himself from James Baker:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/03/24/jeb-bush-stresses-support-for-israel-in-wake-of-james-bakers-comments/?postshare=641427205120298
BillZBubb
(10,650 posts)Bush is running a race geared to the far right of the republican party. Of course, he'll distance himself from Baker during that race.
Brother Buzz
(36,498 posts)He will continue to be the man behind the curtain pulling strings.
tk2kewl
(18,133 posts)and i really don't give a hoot what Jim Baker thinks even when hhe might agree with me
BillZBubb
(10,650 posts)but the key is that Baker adds a bipartisan color to the debate.
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)are dying off, while the TP (Tea Party or Toilet Paper, you decide ) republicans are taking over.
Behind the Aegis
(54,053 posts)Yeah, it is.
See, even a bigot is right every now and again.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)Behind the Aegis
(54,053 posts)PCIntern
(25,643 posts)Now James Baker is the new hero of DU!!! WOW!
He's an anti-Semite of the first order...oh...am I allowed to say that here? My apologies to the JAMES BAKER FAN CLUB. DU's new best friend...
DonViejo
(60,536 posts)James Baker "is the new hero of DU"?
Would you also be so kind to point me in the direction of the Baker Fan Club at DU, I want to see who those folks are. And so far, the only person that has declared Baker "DU's new best friend" is you.
PCIntern
(25,643 posts)just sit back and watch! I'm an early prognosticator.
elleng
(131,372 posts)notadmblnd
(23,720 posts)The remark was made in context of Jews in the US vote Democratic and not Republican. Was the remark improper? Yes, I think so, but that quote alone does not make James Baker an anti Semite.
question everything
(47,583 posts)They know that they need to "reach out to minorities" and these usually are African Americans and Latinos.
A recent comment said that just getting the white votes that Bush got in 2004 won't be enough.
Oh, but what a prize to split the Jewish vote that traditionally has been a reliable Democratic block.
BillZBubb
(10,650 posts)Nothing Baker said is untrue concerning Netanyahu. But you don't address that.
Behind the Aegis
(54,053 posts)That's right there, in the very post to which you responded!
ismnotwasm
(42,023 posts)There is no "anti-Semite" card here
BillZBubb
(10,650 posts)isn't claiming anti-Semitism?
MrBig
(640 posts)If David Duke made a comment you agreed with, would you then defend his character? Or would you acknowledge that, on this issue, there is agreement, while still acknowledging the guy is a bigot?
PCIntern
(25,643 posts)He's a GREAT GUY who also said, "Fuck the Jews". What seems to be the problem around here?
just in case...
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)And I suppose you would defend someone that uses the N word as not a racist, and someone who uses the word f-g to describe a member of the LGBT community is not a homophobe, right?
BillZBubb
(10,650 posts)Using the N word is racist. Using the F word is homophobic. Using the word Jews is not. It is certainly not anti-Semitic.
Adding the words "fu_k the" in front of it might be anti-Semitic depending on the context. The context is everything. My guess is that Baker is not an anti-Semite and that he was referring to a certain group of Jews who were demanding he do something he didn't want to do, not all Jews in general. There is certainly no other evidence that he is anti-Semitic.
Besides, attacking him is a deflection from the truth he spoke about Netanyahu.
MrBig
(640 posts)Still see it the same way?
BillZBubb
(10,650 posts)PCIntern
(25,643 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)100% agreement with me.
uppityperson
(115,681 posts)Are you saying he meant "fuck those people over there" not "the Jews"?
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,719 posts)"Fuck the Jews. They didn't vote for us (Republicans) any way."
He said it in a Cabinet meeting and Jack Kemp who was the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development at the time dropped the dime on him ergo:
(Or that James Baker, his father's secretary of State and closest of friends, was famously quoted as saying, "Fuck the Jews; they didn't vote for us anyway."
http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/politics/columns/citypolitic/4022/
BillZBubb
(10,650 posts)It's his reply to something someone else said. What was said to him?
For instance, if the statement Baker heard was something like "...Jews are demanding that we adopt policy X" when policy Y was what Baker favored, his reply is not anti-Semitic. In this context he was simply repeating the word used in the original statement about a group of Jews being referenced.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,719 posts)The money shot:
-James Baker
BillZBubb
(10,650 posts)I understand what Baker said, but I want to know the exact wording he was responding to.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,719 posts)Nor does the film explore a notorious quote attributed to Bakerand denied by himwhen American supporters of Israel complained that the Republican secretary of state was being too tough on the Jewish state. Fuck the Jews; they dont vote for us, he allegedly exclaimed in the presence of Bush Is Housing Secretary, the late Jack Kemp.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/03/23/james-baker-s-absurd-pbs-hagiography.html
Substitute any other group for Jews and see how ugly it sounds...
BillZBubb
(10,650 posts)From the limited context available, this was an issue of POLICY and POLITICS, not religious heritage. It is akin to Baker saying "Fu_k the Democrats" or "Fu_k the Liberals" on some other issue.
Crude, hardball politics, but not anti-Semitism.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,719 posts)HIV had a disparate effect on gays...
What if Ronald Reagan in a Cabinet meeting to increase AIDS research funding said "fuck the gays, they didn't vote for us (Republicans) any way?"
BillZBubb
(10,650 posts)If someone said, "Oh Great Communicator, the gays are demanding we increase money for AIDS research." The response you gave would simply be crude politics. It wouldn't make him, by itself, to be a homophobe.
Now, if he had used a derogatory term for gays, that would make a difference. Same thing in Baker's instance.
MrBig
(640 posts)BtA actually agreed with Baker's comments while rightfully chastising him for a history of anti-Semitic comments.
Why so quick to defend the character of a Reagan/Bush Republican?
BillZBubb
(10,650 posts)There was one comment taken out of context.
What I was doing was fighting the attempt to change the topic of the thread. The fact that a prominent senior republican blasted Netanyahu is important. It adds a bipartisan flavor to what the president is trying to achieve.
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)Do you support Netanyahu or the two-state solution?
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)whose prior comment paints him as an anti-semite is not necessary.
LittleBlue
(10,362 posts)I think we have a handful of Likudniks at DU and I'd like to know their names. These discussions are useful in identifying them.
You don't need to cover for that poster, he/she can answer my question on their own.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)What racists have to say about African American equality, what homophobes have to say about LGBT equality and what anti-semites have to say about Jewish rights and security should not matter to Liberals and DUers and that includes, if like a broken clock, they happen to get something right once in a long while.
Baker's antisemitic statement removes him from consideration on anything impacting Jews or Israel.
And that poster's statement was clear about whether they believed in a two-state solution. Baker notwithstanding.
Response to stevenleser (Reply #39)
LittleBlue This message was self-deleted by its author.
Response to stevenleser (Reply #39)
IsItJustMe This message was self-deleted by its author.
Behind the Aegis
(54,053 posts)still_one
(92,506 posts)being done.
democrank
(11,112 posts)They`re few and far between, but once in awhile a sane one breaks free from the enclosure and steps up to the microphone.
Faryn Balyncd
(5,125 posts)A Considerable Speck
"A speck that would have been beneath my sight
On any but a paper sheet so white
Set off across what I had written there.
And I had idly poised my pen in air
To stop it with a period of ink
When something strange about it made me think,
This was no dust speck by my breathing blown,
But unmistakably a living mite
With inclinations it could call its own.
It paused as with suspicion of my pen,
And then came racing wildly on again
To where my manuscript was not yet dry;
Then paused again and either drank or smelt--
With loathing, for again it turned to fly.
Plainly with an intelligence I dealt.
It seemed too tiny to have room for feet,
Yet must have had a set of them complete
To express how much it didn't want to die.
It ran with terror and with cunning crept.
It faltered: I could see it hesitate;
Then in the middle of the open sheet
Cower down in desperation to accept
Whatever I accorded it of fate.
I have none of the tenderer-than-thou
Collectivistic regimenting love
With which the modern world is being swept.
But this poor microscopic item now!
Since it was nothing I knew evil of
I let it lie there till I hope it slept.
I have a mind myself and recognize
Mind when I meet with it in any guise
No one can know how glad I am to find
On any sheet the least display of mind."
Robert Frost
It really is good to see glimpses of sanity, even from surprising sources!
JI7
(89,287 posts)people always have this black/white view of people.
it's only in recent years where republicans are mostly seen as pro israel and that has more to do with their evangelical supporters and just being anti muslim .
BillZBubb
(10,650 posts)He had a few dust ups with Israel when Reagan was president. He isn't always critical, just when they got too extreme for American interests.
I do agree that the republicans have become more pro-Israel. This has happened for a number of reasons: those you mentioned and the fact the Israel's politics have become more right wing.
still_one
(92,506 posts)administration were not just critical of Israel, they despised the Jews, as evidenced by the Nixon tapes. In fact his conversations with Billy Graham were made a lot of headlines at the time.
The ironic thing is that evangelical Christians in the past have not been that friendly toward Jews either, and I suspect the current change in attitude is more to THEIR interpretation of biblical prophecy than actual change of heart
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)Considering Baker's ongoing meddling in the Middle East on behalf of his oil industry buddies, it seems that his pique with Netanyahu may have something to do with oil, its ownership, who gets to pump it, how much they get to pump, and whether or not the world market for oil stays strong and dependable so Baker's bankrollers can be sure the money keeps flowing.
I wonder if any Republicans are going to characterize Baker's remarks as a temper tantrum that Baker should get over? Or is that sort of language reserved for . . . well, not "blah" people, because it's never about race, so stop saying that!
BillZBubb
(10,650 posts)Netanyahu has nothing to do with who will own oil, who pumps it, or how much they pump.
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)But it appears from recent reports that Netanyahu has been siphoning off information from the Iran negotiations and feeding it to his Republican pals in Congress, trying to scuttle any deal before it's even negotiated. Keeping the region volatile has an effect on the oil producing countries in that region. If Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, or some other country is feeling skittish, they might increase production so as to have some more ready cash on hand. Increased supply will bring down the price, and Baker's great and good friends in the oil industry don't much care for smaller returns, especially after the last bout of lower oil prices that brought the pump price in some places in the U.S. to less than $2 a gallon. They've suffered enough already.
Wheels within wheels, and nowadays whenever I see James Baker getting publicly huffy about something (he's a lot more comfortable in the shadows or the penumbra at this stage in his loathesome career), I suspect it has to do with some direct impact on his wallet.
Skidmore
(37,364 posts)in that category.
still_one
(92,506 posts)picture in a very subtle way that President Obama was not being flexible.