Bush opened his mouth today before the Israeli Knesset, and said this little gem:

Some seem to believe we should negotiate with 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 only I could have talked to Hitler, all of 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.

Which is really nothing more than his continuous riff that nobody but him and Joe Lieberman understand the threat we are facing.

Of course, in typical Obama fashion, the “presumptuous” nominee decides that statement is all about him, and responds:

“It is sad that President Bush would use a speech to the Knesset on the 6Oth anniversary of Israel’s independence to launch a false political attack. It is time to turn the page on eight years of policies that have strengthened Iran and failed to secure America or our ally Israel.”

“Instead of tough talk and no action, we need to do what Kennedy, Nixon and Reagan did and use all elements of American power — including tough, principled, and direct diplomacy — to pressure countries like Iran and Syria. George Bush knows that I have never supported engagement with terrorists, and the President’s extraordinary politicization of foreign policy and the politics of fear do nothing to secure the American people or our stalwart ally Israel.”

Well it is nice to see him respond to an (imagined?) attack with something other than insulting voters, but did you see what he did there.

we need to do what Kennedy, Nixon and Reagan did

1 Democrat, 2 Republicans. Nice. No mention of Jimmy Carter, who got a freakin’ Nobel Prize for his work in the Middle East, no mention of Clinton. Hell, he could have mentioned GHW Bush, who handled the collapse of the Soviet Union in a way that made the world a better place. But NOOOO, instead we need to do what Nixon and Reagan did.

Then, along comes Clinton, who despite what her worst detractors believe, really cares about the country and the Democratic party.

President Bush’s comparison of any Democrat to Nazi appeasers is both offensive and outrageous on the face of it, especially in light of his failures in foreign policy. This is the kind of statement that has no place in any presidential address and certainly to use an important moment like the 60th anniversary celebration of Israel to make a political point seems terribly misplaced. Unfortunately, this is what we’ve come to expect from President Bush.

Oh snap!

How come she defends Obama better than he defends himself?

While I applaud Clinton for coming to Obama’s defense(if it was even necessary, I don’t see an attack on Obama in there anywhere, but oh well), especially considering he has never once defended her from horrendous and unpalatable attacks, I can’t think that this really did him any favors.

If by some small chance, Clinton did take the VP spot, is this what we will see until November, Obama taking a hit, and Clinton coming up behind(like his “mommy” as a few commenters at TalkLeft point out) to give the bullies a stern talking to?

He seems to be following the John Kerry Path to Victory, another election that was the Dems to lose.

Makes me feel good, how ’bout you?