In a blatant attempt to misrepresent and smear President Obama on his foreign policy stance toward Israel before a conservative audience, Joe Lieberman gleefully one-upped Sean Hannity.
I'll get to a video and transcript in a moment. Promise.
But first, a bit of background: several months ago, before Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's scorched-earth visit to Washington, President Obama outlined the United States' position on how to best restart negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians.
Among the many things listed was a reiteration of decades-old U.S. policy: that negotiations for borders should be based on 1967 lines with mutually-agreed land swaps. It's the position from which every serious, multilateral negotiation since Oslo has begun.
It's also a position that, after originally huffing and puffing when Obama reiterated it, Netanyahu himself has finally admitted is normative.
And so what did Lieberman have to say about it?
This:
HANNITY: I worry about the President. I didn’t feel he treated the prime minister [of Israel] correctly, when he came to town the first time. I didn’t like when he sprung on him, they got to go back to ’67 borders. I wanted to get your thoughts.
LIEBERMAN: I agree with you. I think the President is not anti-Israel. I think he’s pro-Israel but I think he’s handled the relationship with Israel in a way that has encouraged Israel’s enemies and really unsettled the Israelis. Because the Israelis have one really good friend in the world, it’s us, it’s natural and of course, they are very loyal to us too.
But when the President of the United States acts in a way that makes the Israelis wonder whether we are for them. Really what it does is to discourage them from taking the risk that they would ever have to take to have a peace agreement with the Palestinians or anybody else.
This is absolutely disgusting and utterly false. The reiteration of U.S. policy has not "encouraged Israel's enemies," and Lieberman knows this.
See, Lieberman knows that Obama's original speech, in which he articulated that 1967 borders must be the starting point from which to build negotiations, was actually the most "pro-Israel" delivery that one could have hoped for from the president. Not only did Obama stay silent on the issue of the settlements, but Obama articulated his opposition to the Palestinians' attempt to achieve statehood at the U.N. in September (a process that is now moving forward, regardless).
Obama's speech was, in reality, a huge blow to Abbas and those Palestinians who favor going to the U.N. as a last-ditch effort to achieve statehood in the face of non-existent peace negotiations and the continued expansion of settlements.
Obama's speech was, in reality, a huge boon to Netanyahu's positions and desires. (In other words, exactly what someone like Lieberman, who is hawkish on Israel, wanted to hear.)
And how does Lieberman thank the president?
By misrepresenting his position to a large, conservative audience. With pleasure.
Absolutely disgraceful. And politically damaging (given how important every politician, including Obama, views the conservative "pro-Israel" lobby in America).
Two words for Lieberman: f*ck you.
----------------------------------------
Follow me on Twitter @David_EHG
----------------------------------------