The Hypocrite, The Fanatic, or Obama?

MWC News ^ | Monday, 26 March 2012 | Richard Falk

[presidio9]

The American electorate is facing a presidential election in which there is almost no prospect of a constructive debate. On the Republican side the campaign for the nomination has exhibited the clash of irresponsible and reactionary views, slightly relieved by the libertarian Ron Paul who at least counsel against militarism and the death dance with Israel. All the Republican presidential hopefuls, except Paul, exhibit a craven distaste for reality when they attack Obama for being insufficiently pro-Israeli, as if 95%+ is insufficient. Such a posture, whether meant seriously or not, iexpresses contempt for the intelligence and common sense of the American citizenry.

How can an American president show greater deference to Israel than Obama, who never loses an opportunity to speak adoringly to AIPAC’s annual national gatherings. Of course, it is not only the Middle East that discloses such a regressive Republican zone of agreed lunacy. More disturbing in some respects is the embrace of climate skepticism by all the Republican candidates, rejecting the overwhelming view of the scientific community that global warming is an urgent peril that is already causing extremely harmful effects on weather, oceans, and food security. To refer the matter to God and the Bible is to throw several centuries of trust in reason and scientific understanding of nature and the environment into a toilet of unknowing.

The overwhelming Republican favorite to win the nomination is Mitt Romney, not that the party base loves him, or even trusts him, but because he is thought to be electable. Romney has been convincingly charged with being ‘a vulture capitalist’ in his private sector exploits by Newt Gingrich, who is the most reckless of all the Republican presidential hopefuls,

[presidio9]

Richard Falk Profile Page

Richard Falk is Albert G. Milbank Professor Emeritus of International Law at Princeton University and Visiting Distinguished Professor in Global and International Studies at the University of California, Santa Barbara. He has authored and edited numerous publications spanning a period of five decades, most recently editing the volume International Law and the Third World: Reshaping Justice (Routledge, 2008).

He is currently serving his third year of a six year term as a United Nations Special Rapporteur on Palestinian human rights.

[marstegreg]

It should read “Romney, Santorum or a Communist”

[Psycho_Bunny]

“United Nations Special Rapporteur on Palestinian human rights”

The intellectual equivalent of being a dishwasher at McDonalds, without having any of the dignity bestowed through doing honest work.

[mongo141]

“The intellectual equivalent of being a dishwasher at McDonalds, without having any of the dignity bestowed through doing honest work.

How true, and no doubt tax payers are paying the bill!

[stephenjohnbanker]

” reactionary views “

Stopped right there.....only the left uses this term.

[presidio9]

Labling someone a “fanatic” for honestly stating the positions of the Catholic Church (the largest denomination in the US and the world) could be views as just a tad “reactionary” to some folks.

[no dems]

Just minutes before I read this thread I was asking myself: HOW IN THE HELL DID WE END UP WITH SUCH CRAPPY CANDIDATES? I have a hard time not being mad at people like Jim DeMint, Sarah Palin, Paul Ryan and even Hillbilly Huck for not getting in the reace this year. Any of them would have had the nomination sewed up by now but they didn't get in the race.

[Pollster1]

How can an American president show greater deference to Israel than Obama . . . global warming is an urgent peril that is already causing extremely harmful effects on weather, oceans, and food security.

Falk appears to be completely disconnected from reality. Obama shows barely more deference to Israel than Iranian and Palestinian leaders do, and what he does show appears to be a distasteful act that pains him. As for the harmful effects already being caused by "global warming", sane have trouble believing that a fluctuation of one degree over a century is harmful. It's a good thing this man has tenure, since he is not equipped for the real world.

[SoConPubbie]

It should read “Romney, Santorum or a Communist”

No, to be objective, it should read:

The left-wing, Progressive lying Liberal, Santorum, or a Communist.

[Fred Nerks]

In July 2011, Falk was called on to resign his U.N. appointment as Rapporteur for the Palestinian territories after a cartoon he published on his blog was criticized as being antisemitic and anti-American.[66] The cartoon depicted a dog with a Jewish head-covering and a sweater with the letters "USA" urinating on Lady Justice while devouring bloody human bones.[67]

UN Watch called on United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay to condemn Falk. Pillay responded, saying that the cartoon was antisemitic and objectionable. The United States called Falk's behavior "shameful and outrageous" and "an embarrassment to the United Nations", and officially called on him to resign. US Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, chairwoman of the US House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee called on Falk to resign as well. The Anti-Defamation League described the cartoon as a "message of hatred".[68][69][70]

Falk initially called the complaint by UN Watch against the cartoon a "complete lie". He later removed the cartoon, saying: "Maybe I do not understand the cartoon... I certainly didn’t realize that it could be viewed as anti-Semitic, and still do not realize." Later still, he stated that he had thought the Jewish head covering on the dog, adorned with the Star of David, was a helmet. He acknowledged that the cartoon was antisemitic and apologized for posting it.[67][71]

wiki

[marstegreg]

The left-wing, Progressive lying Liberal, Santorum, or a Communist.

How True! Thank you for the correction. Your version is much more thorough.

[marstegreg]

The left-wing, Progressive lying Liberal, Santorum, or a Communist.

How True! Thank you for the correction. Your version is much more thorough.