Sixty-two percent (62%) of Republicans back Israel’s decision to take military action against the Palestinians, but only half as many Democrats (31%) agree. A majority of Democrats (55%) say Israel should have tried to find a diplomatic solution first, a view shared by just 27% of Republicans.
While 75% of Republicans say Israel is an ally of the United States, just 55% of Democrats agree. Seven percent (7%) of Democrats say Israel is an enemy of America, but only one percent (1%) of Republicans say the same.
Meanwhile, the Democratic Party’s leadership is fully confused and split, and while Senator Obama wasn’t silent about anything for the years he spent running for President now that he’s been elected…he’s silent (busy surfing, golfing, drinkin’, hangin’ out).
The Democratic Party needs to be led, but Obama is silent
Democratic voters need to be led, but Obama is silent
The American press wonders why Obama is suddenly silent
The European press wonders why Obama is suddenly silent
The Arab press wonders why Obama is suddenly silent
Once again, all I have to say is, “Senator, all glory is fleeting”
Author of “Reparations and America’s 2nd Civil War
Reparations and America’s 2nd Civil War: Malensek, Scott: 9798864028674: Amazon.com: Books
dems are all about peace and love and not hurting anyones feelings, but unfortunatelly in the real worls that will get a missle up your butt. isreal is an ally and they are only responding to attacks on them, so the way i see it they are within their rights.
I wonder if they polled the same Democrats who thought Sarah Palin was Obama’s running mate, thought Republicans controlled congress and knew every smear thrown at Sarah Palin but had never heard the truth about Obama, Rezko and Ayers?
It’s pretty clear that these no nothings are totally unaware of the long term diplomatic process that has been going on for decades trying to bring peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians.
And every time Israel has traded land for peace the Pallys have used the land as a base to launch further attacks on Israel.
I doubt the nit wits on the Dem side of this poll are aware that the Pally’s don’t care about peace. Their intention is to destroy Israel. And they MEAN it!
I agree with most of the folks here on their opinion of Obama, I believe in his heart of hearts he is a communist, he is no friend of Israel, and you can judge a man by his friends(Rezko, Wright, Ayers, Dohrn, Frank Davis, to name but a few). Still, he is being very smart here. Why waste his political capitol weighing in on a losing proposition. Right now he is in fact voting “present”. Deferring to Mr. Bush is the best thing he can do here. Coming out on either side of this now will forever define his administration’s position even before he takes office. Giving the Israelis three weeks to do their thing before he comes out in support of a cease fire, and more [futile] talks will allow the pro-Israel faction of the democrats to hold onto their fantasy a little longer.
Thinking about Obama’s lack of response to a major world event, a conclusion I reached earlier is that his cabinet to be may be split and Obama can’t form an opinion because he is depending on the team to tell him what to do. Now that we see the polls, I think it also may be a bit of the age old democrat finger in the wind thing.
Totally agree Missy. If there was any political hay to be made, he’d be all over the news. Since there isn’t, he’s gonna let everything slide. What he and his supporters don’t realize is that the shape of his presidency is being formed right now. A transition of power does not exclusively mean there is only one President; only one has technical power, but the other can have realistic power, and that’s the case. Obama is showing us all right now what kind of a leader he is (or rather is not) and will be (or rather will not be).
Man, George W Bush is gonna have the happiest ride to Capitol Hill EVARH! Then he gets to go back to Crawford and laugh his ass off for 4yrs. O O O O O O O Obama M M M M M Might A A A Actually T T T T T T Try and ddddddddddddddd do something, but good luck. His Chief of Staff said it best, in the WH, it’s ALWAYS a choice between worse and worst. There is not sitting it out after 1/21, and sitting things out now…make things harder in just a few weeks.
Think about it, what’s he gonna do on 1/21? Say, “Gosh, I wish I could’ve had a stimulus package ready to sign, but my fellow Democrats in Congress blew me off” Yeah, right. That’s gonna go over well. Maybe the day after he’s sworn in, he’ll tell Hamas how important it is to stop firing rockets, and by the grace of Allah they won’t reply, “If it was so important to you…why didn’t you say something a month ago?” Yeah, right!
OMG! This is already sounding like a new version of Bonfire of the Vanities.
Um, am I supposed to be surprised by that? Because I’m not.
And Obama? Sheesh. What I’m getting from his silence is that he either doesn’t support Israel, doesn’t want to dare agree publicly with Bush, or is the master of indecision. Newsflash, Obama – this kinda stuff comes with the job you claimed you wanted. It’s not like you’ve been asked to send troops into the region. All people want is your position on this – easily the simplest thing anyone can do. If you can’t manage that, don’t bother showing up to takeover.
“A majority of Democrats (55%) say Israel should have tried to find a diplomatic solution first…”
Good grief! What’s wrong with these democrats? There is no diplomatic solution with radical terrorists. How hard is that to understand? In French, we say: On ne discute pas avec des fous furieux.
The terrorists are not only after Israel, they are also after Occident, they want to erase all of us; we are the Infidels. What’s wrong with Israel killing terrorists?
Obama is properly keeping his mouth shut so as not to confuse the world as to the US position on anything until he takes office. If he said something wouldn’t you be criticizing him for interfering? Let’s hold our criticism until it is warranted, else we sound like the Dems who blamed Bush for everything including Hurricane Katrina.
There will be plenty of Obama statements to criticize in the future.
Funny you don’t think that way about Obama, the candidate, speaking out on Iraq, Afghanistan, troops withdrawals, trying to postpone SOFAs, and negotiations with despots and tyrants, bigterguy. Also hypocritical that you don’t mind him speaking out as PEBO on auto bailout, and other economic policies, Iran, troop withdrawal and everything else during his transition period. Until he decided to vacation in Hawaii, he raced to the media dais daily. And many of his statements ran counter to the current US position.
But for you, it’s okay for him to vote “present” on the largest issue on the int’l front while hiding behind the same excuse (one POTUS at a time). An excuse to be silent that he has trotted out only for this.
Do I want him to make a comment? Yes. Like so much else about Obama, we are clueless to how he genuinely stands. Rahm, the mouthpiece, made it abundantly vague on the talking head circuit last week.
Will I like what he says? Who the heck knows…. can’t tell you until he says it. But like so many other times, Obama dodges and deflects instead of answering. This is my major problem with Obama. Soaring rhetoric with lofty phrases that says nothing, and attempts to straddle the fence.
You are one of those that will be happy to extend Obama’s “affirmative action” honeymood period into 2010, I see. Until then, the man’s sheeeeet don’t stink. Get back to us in, say, about 18 months of so.
This country, like Obama, is just flying by the seat of her pants. Dems have checked history, reason, and logic at the door.
*snicker*
Among so many other things, wasn’t withdrawing 9,000 Isaeli settlers from their homes and handing over the Gaza Strip an attempt at “diplomatic solution”?
Why don’t the self-righteous peace-lovers criticize Hamas for not seeking “diplomatic solutions”? Lobbing a thousand Qassam rockets is acceptable, I suppose, so long as they don’t actually “disproportionately” kill “too many” Israelis. So the proportionate response would have been….what? Israeli lobbing a thousand rockets back? Critics would still hail that as a “disproportionate response” because Israel’s precision-guided munitions would actually hit their targets (not intentionally directed at civilians, unlike Hamas).
Let’s see… that would be 55% of the same types who don’t know who Pelosi or Reid are? Or perhaps those who didn’t know which policy belonged to which candidate in the 2008 election?
Right… polls… feh. Ask 1000 idiots a question, and you’ll get 1000 idiotic answers and opinions.
Obama is “silent,” because there is only one President at a time.
Yes, the electorate is very uninformed.
This is an interesting quiz:
http://www.rethinkingschools.org/just_fun/games/mapgame.html
Drag the country name to the proper place on the map.
He sure wasn’t silent for the past 2yrs on such issues, so that “one President at a time” line doesn’t carry water. Nope. I think he’s silent because he’s afraid of alienating someone, anyone, and that this will be the trend for his admin: silence, caveat, lawyerspeak, and fear of alienation. The man has NO record of politically brave decisions, and we shouldn’t believe he’ll make them in the future…but we should EXPECT a PRESIDENT to do just that.
@Larry Weisenthal:
Larry, you’re smarter than that. Where was he “silent” from his “president-elect” podium for the past month-and-a-half, even though there’s “only one president at a time”?
Re: @MataHarley:
btw, you forgot to sign your name to the end of your comment, Larry. I almost forgot who wrote comment #13
wordsmith/not really from nantucket