Posted on 08/16/2015 10:45:23 AM PDT by markomalley
Chris Wallace grilled Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson on “Fox News Sunday” over a recent op-ed the former neurosurgeon wrote in The Jerusalem Post, which called Obama the “Divider in Chief” and accused the president of using “anti-Semitic themes” in a recent speech.
“Shockingly, his diatribe also was replete with coded innuendos employing standard anti-Semitic themes involving implied disloyalty and nefarious influences related to money and power,” Carson wrote, referencing Obama’s speech at American University where he said “it’s those hardliners chanting ‘Death to America’ who have been most opposed to the deal. They’re making common cause with the Republican caucus.”
“Question, Barack Obama, anti-Semitic?” Wallace asked Carson.
“All you have to do, Chris, is like I have, go to Israel and talk to average people, you know, on all ends of that spectrum. And I couldn’t find a single person there who didn’t feel that this administration had turned their back on Israel. And I think the position of president of United States should be one where you begin to draw people together behind a vision, not one where you castigate those who believe differently from you. I think it’s a possibility for great healing if it is used in the correct way.”
Wallace further pressed: “But it’s one thing, one could argue, your policy differs from Israel, but you say in your article — and you’re talking about his domestic critics here in this country — that there is anti-Semitic themes there. What specifically is anti-Semitic in what the president is saying?”
“Well, I think anything is anti-Semitic that is against the survival of a state that is surrounded by enemies and by people who want to destroy them,” Carson responded. “And to sort of ignore that and to act like everything is normal there and that these people are paranoid, I think that’s anti-Semitic.”
(snip)
But just as shocking as the decision to actually agree to such a flawed deal are the lengths to which the administration is going today to tar and feather those who dare speak out against it. By playing politics with a critical national security issue, President Obama is cementing his well-earned legacy as the Divider in Chief.
In a speech at American University defending the deal Obama stooped to new lows far beneath the dignity of the office of the presidency, savaging deal opponents as warmongers and saying that “those hardliners chanting ‘Death to America’” in Iran were “making common cause with the Republican caucus.”
Shockingly, his diatribe also was replete with coded innuendos employing standard anti-Semitic themes involving implied disloyalty and nefarious influences related to money and power. One can only imagine the sting of his words on members of his own Democratic party, especially those Jewish Members of Congress who have publicly stated their opposition to this deal based on its merits or lack thereof.
It takes a certain amount of courage to stand on principle rather than falling into line in support of a risky agreement that flies in the face of America’s strategic interests. In my book, doing what you feel is correct even when it is not politically expedient and requires you to withstand relentless pressure from the White House and its surrogates constitutes true leadership.
Since his speech, the reverberations of Obama’s reckless, spiteful language have been ringing out across the United States, causing grave concern. Leaders from across the political spectrum, including prominent fellow Democrats have stepped forward to decry the White House’s bully tactics
In the end, all Americans are left to wonder why divisive, scurrilous rhetoric and heavy-handed political hardball are necessary to defend this deal. If the agreement with Iran can actually withstand the test of scrutiny, then why is the White House so afraid of an open discussion about the deal and its shortcomings and so quick to demonize those who think America deserves better?
(remainder snipped)
I'm glad he is showing himself to be unique in this campaign as one who is not afraid to call a spade a spade!
Son of mike. No surprise.
So you’re not even allowed to speak the truth anymore? The elephant in the room in Jewish circles is that Obama always speaks in an anti-semetic tone. It’s just a matter of whether your want to admit it or not.
All the candidates should get the same questions.
Tailor-made "gotcha" questions that are specific to one candidate is tabloid trash territory.
Which is where Chris belongs.
Chris Wallace is your typical a snarky, arrogant, over confident, not so bright I gotta where shades type.
Carson correctly points out that it is actually anti-semitic to abandon Israel and not care at all if Israel is bothered by it. Wallace is being anti-Semitic, just like his master Obama.
Well, “conservatives” may no longer speak the truth as it is sure to offend someone. Libs never speak the truth anyway so the ban doesn’t apply to them.
‘bama is not anti-semetic. He just hates Jews.
Obama’s not anti-Semitic. He just hates Jews with every fiber of his Satantic being.
Wallace (Jewish) wants Jews to climb into those cattle cars.
Carson doesn’t. Nuff said
Chris Wallace exposes himself as a racist on national TV...
I’m glad that Wallace asked this question to give Carson the chance to talk about Obama’s hatred of the state of Israel and his siding with Moslems who want to destroy it and to kill anyone who is Jewish, whether faithful or cultural heritage.
Chris Wallace is just another worthless reporter. Truth is not in his dictionary.
I’m watching the interview now. That is ripping? Man is everybody getting thin skins. He simply asked about his statement and asked him to clarify what he meant. Dr. Carson told him and that was it.
A real piece of crap, just like his dad.
George Will is speaking to Chris Wallace right now on Fox. George just compared support for Trump to primal scream therapy.
lol
a) Weakens America/AmericansThere are NO counter examples.
b) Distances America's allies
c) Strengthens America's enemies
d) Attacks Christianity
e) Serves Islam
f) Harms Israel
Or some combination of the above.
Maybe when he eats an ice cream cone, he doesn’t do any of these things. But it’s a rare exception :-)
Someone should ask George, if Trump is the nominee will you support him? These creeps get to act like someone's bad for not wanting to get behind a candidate they abhor, what about them?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.