And, by the way, is President Obama  still eager to hand over the Golan Heights and  Lebanon. to Assad?

And, by the way, is President  Obama still eager to hand over Georgia and Ukraine to Russia, Taiwan to China, Columbia to Chavez?

Jacobti,

I love Israel every bit as much as I presume you do.  Wicked sorry, but right now, in the midst of an economic meltdown right here at home, the question is, who do you think will do right by our country.  The USA.

I think McCain's erratic behavior today - and since he chose Palin - goes to show who we can trust in a rough patch.

But please, remain stuck in your Obama-is-an-antisemitic-Israel-hating-Muslim fantasy,

Obama is not s-an-antisemitic-Israel-hating-Muslim . He is typical  West-European see no evil hear no evil liberal.

rlgordonma  ,

Were you going to vote for McCain but changed your mind after he chose Palin?

"And, by the way, is President Obama  still eager to hand over the Golan Heights and  Lebanon. to Assad?

And, by the way, is President  Obama still eager to hand over Georgia and Ukraine to Russia, Taiwan to China, Columbia to Chavez?"

Since when do we own any of these places?  How can anybody 'hand over' what is not theirs to hand over?  

BTW, Palin is a dealbreaker.  In no way can anyone so unprepared be installed as VP to a 72yo 4-time cancer survivor, she dooms the McCain ticket.

All of this, of course, is just my humble opinion.

BTW, Obama  is a dealbreaker.  In no way can anyone so unprepared be installed as President.

Jacob, it's not Obama's decision to make. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it was Ehud Olmert, not -- NOT -- Barack Obama who began the negotiations between Israel and Syria. No American president can force Israel into an agreement it doesn't want. (Actually, that's not true -- see Bibi's Wye River madness.) Regardless, No president WILL force Israel to give up the Golan. Even Sarah Palin is not oblivious to the fact that Hizballah presents a severe threat to Israeli security. (Again, I have exaggerated. But you get the point.)

rozenson  said

"it's not Obama's decision to make. "

Don't argue with me. Argue with Marty. He asked the question "by the way, is Secretary Rice still eager to hand over the Golan Heights to Assad?"

jacobtl,

I have been pro-Obama, but was excited that McCain won the GOP nomination, as he represented the only chance that I would have thought about voting GOP.  My support for Obama solidified as the campaign wore on - and the news got tougher.  But choosing Palin has completely thrown me off the rails.  It is a sign of tactics over strategy - exactly how we got into the mess we;re in now.

On Obama & Golan

True, the most recent round of Israel - Syria Golan giveaway talks were initiated by Olmert and picked up steam as his legal problems deepened, problems which ultimately have led to his resignation.  Bush & Rice were against the talks for the simple but prescient reason that they thought Syria would leverage their existence to work its way out of the relative international isolation in which it was justifiably mired, but would not really give up anything or change its behavior in return.  Of course they turned out to be right.

But Obama & the US left in general thought it to be a bad idea to isolate Assad jr. and so they encouraged the talks.  A major major champion of the talks, and a discounted Golan giveaway is former US ambassador to Egypt & Israel, Danny Kurtzer who is Obama's majo adviser on all things middle east and may well have a senior policy position in an Obama administration.

The rationale used by Olmert and those Israelis who support his Golan giveaway (like Ehud Barak most of the Labor Party, Meretz (of course) and other far lefties); Livi has been mute on the issue and the suspicion is that she is against it) is that Syria will get the Golan only after the PROMISE to abandon Hezbollah and distance themselves from Iran -- and Syria will NEVER break a promise.  But it seems that Syria won't even do that and has repeatedly said quite publicly that its close relations with Syria and Hezbollah will remain in place without any reservations.

And yet Ehud & Ehud (and an assorted collection of ex-Oslo Accordians) keep on saying that with just a little effort and forthcoming-ness on Israel's part, the Syria-Hezbollah-Iran axis can be broken (admittedly a strategic interest of Israel) at the low low bargain basement price of just giving up the Golan.

BTW, among all of its other strategic, water, and historical assets, the Golan is a great place to vacation and many many Israelis from a wide range of political views do just that (we were just there a couple of weeks ago for a plea sent stay up on Mt. Hermon).  And there are some very fine wineries on the Golan making wine from locally grown grapes (Israel introduced modern day viticulture on the Golan).

Hershel Ginsburg

Jerusalem  / Efrata